Patriots QB Conundrum - How Many, And Who?

[PP2]

3

 

[Simpelton]

I am glad it's BB and McDaniels who will make the decision in the end. But on those plays Stidham got sacked Hoyer wouldn't have a prayer and he's less mobile too.

On two of the plays Stidham got sacked, there was an unblocked linebacker making plays after the OL was fully engaged. It was a good defensive design and the OL wasn't ready for ut. Stidham had no chance, any QB goes down when the OL breaks down like that and lets a pass rusher through completely unblocked. I'm sure Scar will be having a word with his men about not getting tunnel vision on the guy in front of them.

On the other one, it was a complete breakdown by the OL, they were just overmatched and had a bad snap, and Stidham did some very good work escaping 2-3 different tackles before he was finally brought down.

 

[Simpelton]

It all makes too much sense[/QUOTE]

No. Do not specifically need Hoyer on the roster. We might need a competent short term backup until they're sure Stidham is up to speed. Nothing I know of on this earth forces that to be Hoyer.

Frankly veteranosity is extremely overrated when it's not paired with actual talent. Whether Stidham or Hoyer is taking the snaps a disabled Brady would be taking, IMHO the season is effectively over either way. Unless they think he'll be hurt out there, I'd rather take a lost year and get the youngster some reps. Letting a veteran backup stand in out there just because veteran is the kind of old-guard thinking that dooms dynasties.

Imagine if in 2001 we'd given the ball back to Bledsoe because veteran. Veteran means nothing. Play the better player. And nothing I've seen out there this year suggests that Hoyer is, right now, a better player than Stidham.

Hoyer is an adequate backup with a good mind, very bad arm, and no upside
Stidham looks like an adequate backup with a decent mind, solid arm, and plenty of upside.

He'd still struggle against NFL level competition, but at this point in his career so would Hoyer.

Besides, I trust BB's system. A couple years ago they were forced to run Jacoby Brissett out there with nothing but a training camp's worth of experience and a good attitude, and he went out there, played through a broken thumb in his throwing hand, and went 1-1.

While I love Brissett's attitude for being willing to stand in there and lead a team he barely knew, despite a serious injury impacting his performance, I actually think Stidham is better now than Brissett was then. It could wind up surprising us what they could do with a guy like Stidham if they absolutely had to.

 

[Doctor DDS]

I would roll the dice and go with just Stidham. I do think that Hoyer would be the better short term option but am not sure the difference is wide enough to lose the 53rd roster player and the potential future they will have. It's a risk but one I think is worth taking.

 

[mgteich]

King's loss means that there is serious need on ST's.

I think something needs to be said that applies both to the QB and WR positions, and it's something I wish I didn't have to say:

If King's injury is as bad as some seemed to think, we're looking at a roster spot, that many thought was locked in, now being open.

 

[SBLIII]

 

[PatsFan2]

On two of the plays Stidham got sacked, there was an unblocked linebacker making plays after the OL was fully engaged. It was a good defensive design and the OL wasn't ready for ut. Stidham had no chance, any QB goes down when the OL breaks down like that and lets a pass rusher through completely unblocked. I'm sure Scar will be having a word with his men about not getting tunnel vision on the guy in front of them.

On the other one, it was a complete breakdown by the OL, they were just overmatched and had a bad snap, and Stidham did some very good work escaping 2-3 different tackles before he was finally brought down.

I agree the D gets paid to play too: that said IF the unthinkable happens I would like us to roll with Stidham instead of Hoyer. We already know what Hoyer can do he will be good for a game or two and completely $h!t the bed when it matters...Hoyer reminds me of Ryan Fitzpatrick.

 

[Simpelton]

I agree the D gets paid to play too: that said IF the unthinkable happens I would like us to roll with Stidham instead of Hoyer. We already know what Hoyer can do he will be good for a game or two and completely $h!t the bed when it matters...Hoyer reminds me of Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Fitz has an arm. Hoyer is smart, smarter than Fitz who is a bit of a meathed, but he's a checkdown QB at best.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

="Simpelton, post: 5630462, member: 38409"]It all makes too much sense



Frankly veteranosity is extremely overrated when it's not paired with actual talent. Whether Stidham or Hoyer is taking the snaps a disabled Brady would be taking, IMHO the season is effectively over either way. Unless they think he'll be hurt out there, I'd rather take a lost year and get the youngster some reps. Letting a veteran backup stand in out there just because veteran is the kind of old-guard thinking that dooms dynasties.

We shall see. If we suffer the unthinkable, a "lost year" we might also get our youngster killed which would ruin his development. I am not a big fan of Brian Hoyer but one does not obtain "veteranosity" (longevity) in the NFL without displaying talent on the practice field. The reason Brady was able to permanently take the job from Bledsoe was because he was consistently displaying his talent on the practice field that year. Keep in mind it was his second year.

 

[zydecochris]

Fitz has an arm. Hoyer is smart, smarter than Fitz who is a bit of a meathed, but he's a checkdown QB at best.

Well, maybe. I agree that Hoyer is smart. And, education is not the same as intelligence, I think of education more as a way to discipline and guide intelligence. Nevertheless, I've never heard the Harvard educated Fitz referred to as a "meathead", and I think he had the highest Wonderlick score in history: Ryan Fitzpatrick - Wikipedia

Before everyone jumps over me, I understand that the Wonderlick is probably a questionable predictor of intelligence, and as described before just because Fitz is Harvard educated doesn't mean he is a genius.

I actually consider Brady the most intelligent QB ever, I think he really is a football genius.

I guess I'm objecting to describing Fitz as a "meathead". Players that hit their girlfriends or wives, they are meatheads. Or, someone like Richie Incognito. Or, perhaps players that threaten to quit football because they don't like to change helmets.

--EDIT: I think it should have been the highest Wonderlick score for a QB in history.

 

[NormZauchin]

We shall see. If we suffer the unthinkable, a "lost year" we might also get our youngster killed which would ruin his development. I am not a big fan of Brian Hoyer but one does not obtain "veteranosity" (longevity) in the NFL without displaying talent on the practice field. The reason Brady was able to permanently take the job from Bledsoe was because he was consistently displaying his talent on the practice field that year. Keep in mind it was his second year.

I think that the potentially outstanding Patriot defense is a reason for keeping Hoyer. A game manager quarterback paired with a stifling defense could win a number of games in Brady's absence, particularly with a strong running game at his disposal.

 

[Deus Irae]

King's loss means that there is serious need on ST's.

But the player who replaces King may not be an ST, or at least not an ST-only, guy. They may replace King with multiple other players who are ST capable, but haven't been playing them, for example. I'm not saying that it will happen, but we just don't know BB's decision yet.

 

[Uptown]

 

[ALP]

Our D and running game this year is gonna be really good, meaning average qb may be good enough to win a champ, a rookie is too much of a wildcard for that to happen, we keep Hoyer because w this d and this run game he could conceivably win a SB, a rookie most likely wont

 

[PatsFan2]

Our D and running game this year is gonna be really good, meaning average qb may be good enough to win a champ, a rookie is too much of a wildcard for that to happen, we keep Hoyer because w this d and this run game he could conceivably win a SB, a rookie most likely wont

What?? Minus Brady our 2019 Schedule ain't that easy. Our opponents would be licking their chops with the likes of Hoyer at the helm.

 

[Simpelton]

We shall see. If we suffer the unthinkable, a "lost year" we might also get our youngster killed which would ruin his development.

I get what you're saying but I don't think that you can actually afford to think like that as an NFL GM. Risk is part of the game. You never know who's going to get hurt but that doesn't mean you can afford to run scared.

If you think, as I do, that Stidham is the second best quarterback we have on the roster when you factor in both upside and projectability, you act accordingly and accept the risks. If you're really smart, you have a contingency plan if something is wrong, but that doesn't necessarily mean you need to consume a roster spot on that contingency plan. The QB3 plan can simply be "who would I trade for and what would I offer?" There's always a handful of buy-low candidates floating around out there that change hands around the deadline after all

I'd rather lose a 3-4 round pick over clogging up a roster spot with a redundant player who almost literally never saw the field for us last year. I'd rather have a guy who can be a factor in special teams than waste a roster space that way. At least with Stidham as the backup there's developmental upside. Hoyer doesn't even have that going for him.

I am not a big fan of Brian Hoyer but one does not obtain "veteranosity" (longevity) in the NFL without displaying talent on the practice field. The reason Brady was able to permanently take the job from Bledsoe was because he was consistently displaying his talent on the practice field that year. Keep in mind it was his second year.

Sure. But the problem is the last few times Hoyer's had to showcase his talent the result has been distinctly forgettable. Talent isn't something you have and then keep forever. In his mid 30s and 8 years removed from his last QBR north of 60 it's fair to ask the question of how much Hoyer would actually help us on the field even if we asked him to. If we like him on the scout team hire him as a coach, don't spend a precious roster spot for that, its not a good use of assets IMHO.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Like I said we shall see.

Hoyer is not great however he has been exposed to another NFL team's starting Defense.

Stidham has not.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

*IF* Hoyer is retained, look out for Stidham next year.

 

[patfanken]

Your post is really hightlighting the issue, IMO. Does BB think Stidham, who's not ready to be the #2, is close enough to ready to be the #2 that he can get rid of the guy who's already a capable #2 and is able to fill in as the #1, if needed? He lucked out in 2012, the year he cut Hoyer and kept Mallet, because Mallet was not ready, and never got ready. Is he willing to take that gamble again?

That's what we're going to find out.

Well put, but he's lucked out twice. Back in 2009 just a year after Brady's ACL lost season, Bill went with a rookie UDFA to be Tom's only back up. Now that took major league sized balls when you think back on it.

But here's the thing that is starting to sway me from the three QB camp. I would agree with you that Stidham is not ready to start the season as the Pats QB on the 8th of September. But would he be ready in early November? By then he'd have had about 50 additional practices and meetings to improve his recognition and understanding of the pro game.

Then you have to balance THAT with whichever player who you would get to keep with the Hoyer roster spot. Unfortunately we don't know who that is going to be. If we did, we could make a value to value assessment. I can infer that it would be a younger player who the Pats think has a high upside and potential to make some kind of contribution on the field THIS season, with the upside of being a bigger contributor down the road.

If that player is one of Cowart, Munson, Malafanu, or Meyers, then I'm ready to take that risk to keep one of those players. If its to keep someone like Gant, Kamalu, or even Crossen or Pennell, then in my mind its not worth the risk.

So not to sound wishy-washy, but to me its all about WHO the player is that is going to be saved by taking away Hoyer's roster spot.

 

[Zuma]

But here's the thing that is starting to sway me from the three QB camp. I would agree with you that Stidham is not ready to start the season as the Pats QB on the 8th of September. But would he be ready in early November? By then he'd have had about 50 additional practices and meetings to improve his recognition and understanding of the pro game.

This. And IMO also would be more involved with weekly game planning if he were QB2 and not QB3. Let's get Stidham up to speed as quickly as possible.