O'Connell's style of play compared to Brady - does it matter?

[JoeSixPat]

While I'm on record as defending Cassell's performance on Sunday as something other than that deeming him a "bust" on Sunday night, I'm overall pretty impressed with O'Connell and can see him winning the role as developmental backup QB over Cassell.

Assuming they don't bring a veteran in and O'Connell's the #2 QB I thought I'd open discussion to his style of play.

From the limited reps I've seen of him in the pre-season, he strikes me as very mobile, very athletic and is not one to be constrained to being a pocket passer. In that respect he's very different from Brady's style of a pocket passer (albeit with incredible pocket presence and the ability to move up and evade pressure).

Seeing as its a given that the Offense is tailored to Brady, how important do folks here deem it that the backup QB play a similar style?

Personally, regardless of whether its O'Connell or someone else, I don't think a similar style of play is the most important issue for a #2 QB. If Brady couldn't play I'd think they'd run a very simple offensive scheme for the backup, minimizing a difference in QB style.

Should there be a long term need for a backup QB I think then one begins to tweak the offense to that QB's strengths, but I view it far more important to have the best QB (developmental or veteran) available serve in the backup role, regardless of QB style of play.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Have I characerized O'Connell correctly? Or am I selling him short in his abilities as a pure pocket passer (he certainly has the size, and his stats in colllege were pretty impressive.

In fact his QB ratings are outstanding - but he clearly likes to bootleg ... looks like he averaged 10 runs a game at SDS - with 11 rushing TDs last year too - not bad at all.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/stats?playerId=147785

So again - it seems to me we're not talking about a Tom Brady clone here - but I don't think that's all that important. Any thoughts?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

While I'm on record as defending Cassell's performance on Sunday as something other than that deeming him a "bust" on Sunday night, I'm overall pretty impressed with O'Connell and can see him winning the role as developmental backup QB over Cassell.

Assuming they don't bring a veteran in and O'Connell's the #2 QB I thought I'd open discussion to his style of play.

From the limited reps I've seen of him in the pre-season, he strikes me as very mobile, very athletic and is not one to be constrained to being a pocket passer. In that respect he's very different from Brady's style of a pocket passer (albeit with incredible pocket presence and the ability to move up and evade pressure).

Seeing as its a given that the Offense is tailored to Brady, how important do folks here deem it that the backup QB play a similar style?

Personally, regardless of whether its O'Connell or someone else, I don't think a similar style of play is the most important issue for a #2 QB. If Brady couldn't play I'd think they'd run a very simple offensive scheme for the backup, minimizing a difference in QB style.

Should there be a long term need for a backup QB I think then one begins to tweak the offense to that QB's strengths, but I view it far more important to have the best QB (developmental or veteran) available serve in the backup role, regardless of QB style of play.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Have I characerized O'Connell correctly? Or am I selling him short in his abilities as a pure pocket passer (he certainly has the size, and his stats in colllege were pretty impressive.

In fact his QB ratings are outstanding - but he clearly likes to bootleg ... looks like he averaged 10 runs a game at SDS - with 11 rushing TDs last year too - not bad at all.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/stats?playerId=147785

So again - it seems to me we're not talking about a Tom Brady clone here - but I don't think that's all that important. Any thoughts?

I think that is why it's pretty clear he's not here to be a replacement or backup. He's here to be developed as a potential trading chip. Your backup should be as close as possible to your starter. That was what Flutie attempted to do when he was here - even down to mastering Brady's cadence. A true backup should know the entire offense and be capable of running it. You shouldn't have to dumb it down for him or ask 23 other guys to start doing things differently than you've spent months if not years coaching them to do.

 

[jeffbiologist]

He was not a runner at SDST, he had a bad OL and was running for his life alot. The team likes his arm, his head, and can live with and mold the rest. I dont think its necessary for the backup QB to emulate Brady(there are worse guys though!), but I am sure they have the idea that they want to mold a guy that can play "their system" rather than reworking the whole gameplan. That said, I am sure they will try to exemplify his assets and limit his liabilities. His youthful legs will allow him to not process into a 4-5 route read, but thats not saying we WANT a mobile/change of pace type of QB.

 

[ALP]

i believe that it is more beneficial for the backup QB to have a similar style to the starter, rather then have a different style...

the whole offense will need to adjust quite a little bit if we have a running QB

 

[PonyExpress]

I don't see O'Connell being the #2 until 2009. If BB deems Cassel/Gutierrez unfit for command he will find a vet to back up Brady this season, a Harrington or Sims type.

As for O'Connell... I think he has the potential to be a winning Qb, the kind that can take a solid team to the playoffs at 10-6 every other year. A 59% passer with 3300 yards, 20 TDs and 16 INTs kind of a guy, with maybe 5 TDs rushing and the ability to threaten all three levels of the D. Also, the ability to lead the occasional game winning drive due to his escapability and big arm. Not bad for a backup in 2009.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

If I recall correctly.... Drew's style was considerably different than Tom's and the offense in 2001 was designed around Drew's style. I think BB did and adequate job at tweaking the offense to work within the back up's style.

 

[RayClay]

He's a project who has the ability to run. Running QBs don't make it and he'll learn to stay in the pocket. Nothing wrong with running when you have to IMO.

 

[jeffbiologist]

If I recall correctly.... Drew's style was considerably different than Tom's and the offense in 2001 was designed around Drew's style. I think BB did and adequate job at tweaking the offense to work within the back up's style.

Do you remember how awkward and gangly TB was in his combine?? There is NO WAY anyone would think he could of turned into this type of QB. To compare him when drafted to Bledsoe is appropriate. And they dont work the offense to the QB as much as the QB LEARNS and adapts to the offense.

 

[AzPatsFan]

While I'm on record as defending Cassell's performance on Sunday as something other than that deeming him a "bust" on Sunday night, I'm overall pretty impressed with O'Connell and can see him winning the role as developmental backup QB over Cassell.

Assuming they don't bring a veteran in and O'Connell's the #2 QB I thought I'd open discussion to his style of play.

From the limited reps I've seen of him in the pre-season, he strikes me as very mobile, very athletic and is not one to be constrained to being a pocket passer. In that respect he's very different from Brady's style of a pocket passer (albeit with incredible pocket presence and the ability to move up and evade pressure).

Seeing as its a given that the Offense is tailored to Brady, how important do folks here deem it that the backup QB play a similar style?

Personally, regardless of whether its O'Connell or someone else, I don't think a similar style of play is the most important issue for a #2 QB. If Brady couldn't play I'd think they'd run a very simple offensive scheme for the backup, minimizing a difference in QB style.

Should there be a long term need for a backup QB I think then one begins to tweak the offense to that QB's strengths, but I view it far more important to have the best QB (developmental or veteran) available serve in the backup role, regardless of QB style of play.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Have I characerized O'Connell correctly? Or am I selling him short in his abilities as a pure pocket passer (he certainly has the size, and his stats in colllege were pretty impressive.

In fact his QB ratings are outstanding - but he clearly likes to bootleg ... looks like he averaged 10 runs a game at SDS - with 11 rushing TDs last year too - not bad at all.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/stats?playerId=147785

So again - it seems to me we're not talking about a Tom Brady clone here - but I don't think that's all that important. Any thoughts?

KO'C is not executing the Patriot's Offense.

He is a raw rookie, allowed to try a first read, and then run. It is barely successful against third stringers, and would prove a hopeless failure against the first string. If you note his long scarmbles netted not a whole lot, this week versus quite a lot last week, when no one knew what he was going to do.

By contrast Cassel IS executing the Patriot's Offense. He is trying to use the 11 players on Offense. However he is also specifically trying out O-line guys and scrub receivers, in that context too, and they are failing him.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I think that is why it's pretty clear he's not here to be a replacement or backup. He's here to be developed as a potential trading chip. Your backup should be as close as possible to your starter. That was what Flutie attempted to do when he was here - even down to mastering Brady's cadence. A true backup should know the entire offense and be capable of running it. You shouldn't have to dumb it down for him or ask 23 other guys to start doing things differently than you've spent months if not years coaching them to do.

I guess the key words here are "true backup" - and given what I've seen of this team, Belichick doesn't necessarilly prescribe to the "true backup" model.

While we know he's on record (was it yesterday?) saying that he sees the value of a backup as someone who can develop rather than solely a veteran for insurance, if we look at the Bledsoe/Brady model, Belichick decided NOT to select a "true backup" as his #2 QB in 2001 (though perhaps they saw Brady as developing closer to where Bledsoe was, the bottom line was that, he was not yet a "true backup" and yet was still deemed the #2).

Given where Brady was at the time, and how they used him once he stepped in they absolutely DID dumb down the offense for Brady - and they effectively admitted it. They went with a dink and dunk to a large degree (something Bledsoe inexplicably could never handle) and did not trust Brady's ability or confidence to throw deep as often as Bledsoe.

There's no question they ran a simpler, more vanilla offense for Brady when he came in for Bledsoe.

Now perhaps developmentally they viewed Brady and Bledsoe as similar - more similar than Brady and O'Connell perhaps (though I don't want to sell O'Connell's pocket skills short, as anyone with an average 123 passer rating through college likely has some pocket skills) but I'd have to disagree that they wouldn't dumb down or otherwise change the offense if O'Connell or anyone else had to step in for a few weeks.

If I recall correctly.... Drew's style was considerably different than Tom's and the offense in 2001 was designed around Drew's style. I think BB did and adequate job at tweaking the offense to work within the back up's style.

As noted above - yes, absolutely, BB did change/simplify the offense for Brady. I assume they'd do the same for O'Connell or any backup.

I agree with Mo that in that sense, a QB wouldn't be considered a "true backup" but I think BB perscribes to the notion that the QB who is best able to win is the "true backup" rather than selecting the guy who most closely resembles the starter's style.

That's what it looks like to me anyway - not saying anyone's "wrong" here.

 

[Deus Irae]

They went with a dink and dunk to a large degree (something Bledsoe inexplicably could never handle) and did not trust Brady's ability or confidence to throw deep as often as Bledsoe.

Bledsoe is/was a look deep, look tight end, look short pattern reader. That was fine when the O-line held up, but disaster when the line wasn't good, because he was immobile behind that line. Brady is able to scan the entire field in a way that no other current quarterback besides, possibly, Manning can do. It's why the contrast between Brady and Bledsoe seems so stark, even though Bledsoe had a career which most quarterbacks would kill for.

 

[Metaphors]

I don't see O'Connell being the #2 until 2009. If BB deems Cassel/Gutierrez unfit for command he will find a vet to back up Brady this season, a Harrington or Sims type.

I was actually thinking 2010 at first due to the work needed on his mechanics. His delivery was inconsistent and his footwork was generally sloppy. As others have noted, his OL was terrible and the rest of the offense was nothing special so that likely contributed to messing him up.

Seeing how far he has progressed already, your 2009 call may be more likely. It would be nice to see some more game action before drawing too many conclusions, but so far so good.

As for O'Connell... I think he has the potential to be a winning Qb, the kind that can take a solid team to the playoffs at 10-6 every other year. A 59% passer with 3300 yards, 20 TDs and 16 INTs kind of a guy, with maybe 5 TDs rushing and the ability to threaten all three levels of the D. Also, the ability to lead the occasional game winning drive due to his escapability and big arm. Not bad for a backup in 2009.

I think you are underestimating his upside. The thing that struck me about O'Connell in college was that he wasn't an interception machine. He was behind so frequently and under pressure constantly, but still stayed under control and made good decisions.

If he keeps refining his mechanics at the current pace and can translate his field intelligence with the help of good coaching and a great role model, he could become a top NFL starter in time. Of course it is equally possible he reverts to bad habits and/or doesn't put in the time or effort to reach that level. Something tells me the Pats saw something special in him beyond what you can see on tape, so I'm going to be glass-half-full with him for now.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

As a not-so-minor point, remember that college and NFL passer ratings are not calculated the same way.

To compare apples to apples, let's look at their 2007 seasons:

O'Connell: 124.8 NCAA/83.7 NFL
Brady: 164.5 NCAA/117.2 NFL

 

[Fencer]

Phil Simms was about the most Brady-like QB there was pre-Brady.

His back-up was Jeff Hostetler, who was more of a running QB.

Hostetler won Super Bowl MVP with Simms' team.

Of course, in that particular Super Bowl, the defensive game plan was pretty good. And you know who the defensive coordinator was.

 

[PonyExpress]

I was actually thinking 2010 at first due to the work needed on his mechanics. His delivery was inconsistent and his footwork was generally sloppy. As others have noted, his OL was terrible and the rest of the offense was nothing special so that likely contributed to messing him up.

Seeing how far he has progressed already, your 2009 call may be more likely. It would be nice to see some more game action before drawing too many conclusions, but so far so good.



I think you are underestimating his upside. The thing that struck me about O'Connell in college was that he wasn't an interception machine. He was behind so frequently and under pressure constantly, but still stayed under control and made good decisions.

If he keeps refining his mechanics at the current pace and can translate his field intelligence with the help of good coaching and a great role model, he could become a top NFL starter in time. Of course it is equally possible he reverts to bad habits and/or doesn't put in the time or effort to reach that level. Something tells me the Pats saw something special in him beyond what you can see on tape, so I'm going to be glass-half-full with him for now.

Athletically, O'Connell compares to a young Carson Palmer. His physical stature, speed (people forget how fast Palmer was before the cheap shot) and arm strength are almost identical. The difference is accuracy. Palmer was always the proverbial "Juggs" machine [despite some shaky stats pre-Norm Chow]. O'Connell has never been consistently accurate. I think it's very difficult to "learn" accuracy at the age of 23+. You're either accurate or you're not. Experience may get you a few extra %% points, better mechanics may improve you marginally, but by and large you are what you are as far as throwing the ball- especially under duress, off the wrong foot, from crazy arm angles, which NFL QBs deal with frequently. Therefore, I am hesitating to lift the ceiling on O'Connell. I am keeping him at "solid NFL starter" until he [hopefully] proves me wrong.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Bledsoe is/was a look deep, look tight end, look short pattern reader. That was fine when the O-line held up, but disaster when the line wasn't good, because he was immobile behind that line. Brady is able to scan the entire field in a way that no other current quarterback besides, possibly, Manning can do. It's why the contrast between Brady and Bledsoe seems so stark, even though Bledsoe had a career which most quarterbacks would kill for.

The thing that always struck me most about Bledsoe is that he seemed so skilled in the TE/mid range, and long game (had a helluva an arm, and accurate - too accurate in fact for his own good as he thought he could make deep passes he (or his receivers) often couldn't

But ask him to run excell in the short game? For some reason he didn't seem to do well there - so when Brady came in, with his long game (and physical ability to go deep) not yet fully developed they went to a short game - i.e. 101 catches for Troy Brown and a lot of dump passes - and Brady did it exceptionally well.

So that struck me as VERY different from the Bledsoe offense - and not a carbon copy of Bledsoe as some seem to suggest the backup QB should be.

So I guess, while I don't discount the benefit of having a backup who can play the same "game" as the starter, I don't consider that the compelling factor - just give me a QB who can win, however they and the coaches accomplish that - and the coaches DEFINATELY would dumb down the offense - or otherwise adapt it, for a backup if they're going to be in there for a signficant time.

 

[stinkypete]

I think that is why it's pretty clear he's not here to be a replacement or backup. He's here to be developed as a potential trading chip. Your backup should be as close as possible to your starter. That was what Flutie attempted to do when he was here - even down to mastering Brady's cadence. A true backup should know the entire offense and be capable of running it. You shouldn't have to dumb it down for him or ask 23 other guys to start doing things differently than you've spent months if not years coaching them to do.

I don't understand this mindset that every QB the team drafts is meant to be a future trading chip. Draft day trades are typically valued such that a 3rd round pick this year is worth about a 2nd next. Likewise, a high 2nd round pick this year is worth about a 1st rounder next.

To claim that O'Connell was drafted to be a future trading chip is essentially to claim that O'Connell will be viewed by other teams as a legit long term starter, someone worth giving up a first rounder, or a package of day one picks.

Conversely, if the Patriots were only interested in picking up a trading chip and stockpiling for the future, they simply could have traded that pick for a better pick in a future draft.

IMO, any time any team drafts a player, it is to help their team. A 3rd round pick is worth more to most teams than 90% of rookies who were selected in round 3. To draft a guy that high for any purpose than to make the team better would be foolish.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I don't think he has a style issue with regards to being Brady's backup in 2009. He can run faster than Brady but won't be coached or encouraged to run; he'll be coached to be a pocket passer, to read the defense and to throw; on the occassions that he does have to run, though, that will be one thing that he will do better than Brady.

 

[Metaphors]

Athletically, O'Connell compares to a young Carson Palmer. His physical stature, speed (people forget how fast Palmer was before the cheap shot) and arm strength are almost identical. The difference is accuracy. Palmer was always the proverbial "Juggs" machine [despite some shaky stats pre-Norm Chow]. O'Connell has never been consistently accurate. I think it's very difficult to "learn" accuracy at the age of 23+. You're either accurate or you're not. Experience may get you a few extra %% points, better mechanics may improve you marginally, but by and large you are what you are as far as throwing the ball- especially under duress, off the wrong foot, from crazy arm angles, which NFL QBs deal with frequently. Therefore, I am hesitating to lift the ceiling on O'Connell. I am keeping him at "solid NFL starter" until he [hopefully] proves me wrong.

That's fair. I think improved mechanics can improve your accuracy if you are missing receivers by a small margin (high, low, wide). I haven't seen enough of O'Connell in college to know if that is the case. Where I think it really helps is with overall efficiency (I look at completion % and YPA together). A high YPA can make up for a lower completion %, and vice versa.

Take Brady for example. As his mechanics became textbook and repeatable on every single throw, he began hitting receivers more in stride and letting them run. Until the 2006 dropoff due to a limited set of receivers, he was on a path of increasing YPA even if his comp.% was hovering around 60% (last year being ridiculous statistically so it is hard to include in comparisions).

I think O'Connell can take a similar path if he puts in the work. As far as taking coaching and applying it to the field, so far so good. I agree with your "solid NFL starter" assessment as a likely career path. I'm going to keep "top NFL starter" as his upside though. Your Carson Palmer comparison is a good one that I hadn't really thought of before, but probably reflects my feelings on O'Connell's potential. Not predicting it, just seeing it as a possibility.

As for the folks considering O'Connell as a "running" QB, I don't see it. I do see him as adding a dimension (bootleg and moving pocket) that Brady doesn't (and shouldn't) have. I do believe the Pats were on the lookout for someone with Brady's size, arm and intelligence. I absolutely don't believe they were looking for someone with Brady's foot speed and open field mobility.

 

[Metaphors]

I don't understand this mindset that every QB the team drafts is meant to be a future trading chip. Draft day trades are typically valued such that a 3rd round pick this year is worth about a 2nd next. Likewise, a high 2nd round pick this year is worth about a 1st rounder next.

To claim that O'Connell was drafted to be a future trading chip is essentially to claim that O'Connell will be viewed by other teams as a legit long term starter, someone worth giving up a first rounder, or a package of day one picks.

Conversely, if the Patriots were only interested in picking up a trading chip and stockpiling for the future, they simply could have traded that pick for a better pick in a future draft.

IMO, any time any team drafts a player, it is to help their team. A 3rd round pick is worth more to most teams than 90% of rookies who were selected in round 3. To draft a guy that high for any purpose than to make the team better would be foolish.

I don't agree in general with you, but do agree with this when applied to O'Connell. I think QBs are drafted all the time with the hope that they develop enough to turn around for a high draft pick. O'Connell was drafted into a situation where the starter will be pushing 35 when his rookie contract is up. Brady is already a lock for the Hall today and should push himself up the all-time list in the next 4 years. He seems like someone that would pursue other interests rather than drag his tired, beat up body through training camp until he is 38 or 40.

If O'Connell turns into a QB worth a high draft pick in 2011, I think the Pats will be in the market for just such a player. Convenient, huh?