Remember all the fans that wanted to keep Cassel and let Brady go?

[voluntarysaftey]

Those were the same fans that thought Maroney was a top 5 rb because he had 4.5 yards per carry before he got cut. Same fans that thought BJGE was also a top 5 rb using the same stats. Same ones that thought McCourty was solid, until they saw Denard this past week and now think Denard is the next Ty Law.

For some reason there's a large contigent of fans that both over-estimate Patriots players and also take a small sample size and extrapolate it out over a 15 year career turning half of the starters into hall of famers at some point.

I actually do remember there was a debate. Cassel to me at that time seemed like 'decent guy who's not going to screw up but also not the guy you won't if the rest of your team is superbowl worthy'.

I was actually suprised we got a second round pick for him -- and many people were outraged he was let go for less than a first.
Given that he would either be franchise tagged at 9 million or cut, there was really no financial incentive on his part to give a team a discount over what he would get in free agency. And if you have to pay a player free agency money, you're not also going to give up a 1st for him -- hence the pleasant suprise that we got a econd.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Remember all the fans that wanted to keep Cassel and let Brady go?

Anyone who said, wrote or thought that was an arse...and very ignorant.

And they know who they are....

 

[TyronePoole]

Jamal Charles
Dwayne Bowe
Jonathan Baldwin
Tony Moeke
Devin McCulster
Steve Breaston

The Chiefs roster is loaded with talent except at QB. Cassel stinks.

2 of those players are good

 

[Triumph]

2 of those players are good

Cassel cant get the others the ball.

He telegraphs his throws or misses the WR all together.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Jamal Charles
Dwayne Bowe
Jonathan Baldwin
Tony Moeke
Devin McCulster
Steve Breaston

The Chiefs roster is loaded with talent except at QB. Cassel stinks.

McCluster sucks, Breaston is above average at best, I like Baldwin but he hasn't proven to be an impact player yet, and Moeaki has 56 career receptions.

Bowe and Charles are really good, though. Charles' backup isn't bad either.

 

[blackglass3]

If McDaniels and Cassel ended up together in Denver or KC, I think it would have worked. McDaniels should have marketed them as a package deal and gone with the original Cassel to Denver, Cutler to TB, draft picks to NE that we heard about in early 2009.

 

[Fixit]

I think it's hilarious that some people are denying that there was ever any serious debate about trading Brady and keeping Cassel ... that s*** was everywhere at the time.

Next thing you know, people will say that no one ever hated the Walker trade.

 

[Jackson 2]

The farthest I went was saying that I wouldn't be surprised if Belichick traded Brady.

I'd be honestly surprised if the thought didn't at least enter his head somewhere in that 11-5 run.

No offense, but I'd guess no chance that thought ever crossed his mind. Brady's injury in this age of medicine was never considered career threatening by anyone other than the Chicken Littles. BB may be a lot of things. Chicken Little isn't one of them.

 

[Raymond]

I remember the subject being brought up here. Never did I actually come across any live person who was a Pats fan even consider it.

The internet is a funny place.

You can find people who think we never actually landed on the moon.

Or people who think the Earth is flat.

Or even people who think O.J. didn't do it.

But there has never been an actual sighting of a live person who claimed Cassel was the future.

 

[BennyBledsoe]

Never mentioned his injury, Jackson. Just was saying I'd be surprised if the thought didn't enter his head. Younger, cheaper and he could get back a bunch of high draft picks for Brady.

I'm not saying how LONG the thought would have stayed in his head but I'm sure it must have at least passed through the city limits.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

I could barely contain my disgust and anger with anyone who brought this up to me, and there were quite a few who did.

Why are we letting the people who wanted Tebow off the hook though. Rememeber, we could bring in Tebow for sub packages - people actually wrote they wanted to bring Tebow in over Brady in certain situations and that Tebow could be Brady's successor. And that was last year!

 

[condon84]

You missed at least one, and it was the trend setter:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...82624-should-pats-keep-cassel-over-brady.html

LOL. That thread was awesome to read. Thanks.

I somehow missed that thread and didn't post in it, or maybe my mind just couldn't understand such a concept and it read like chinese to me.

 

[aluminum seats]

LOL. That thread was awesome to read. Thanks.

I somehow missed that thread and didn't post in it, or maybe my mind just couldn't understand such a concept and it read like chinese to me.

Hey, sorry I've been late to this. Yup, my post which started all the hyperventilating and vapors around here.........

Let me start by saying until this year I can't remember the last time I missed a Pats' game, but due to unprecedented business travelling, I've missed a bunch.....so I acknowledge at the outset I haven't seen Cassel play nearly as much as I would like.

Having said that, what I saw against the Jets was a confident, energetic, very impressive performance from Cassel. He threw the ball well, led the team, moved extremely well (his scrambling ability is obviously better than Brady's), and overall did an outstanding job. In the few areas he seemed off--eg, the deep ball--I sensed that a little more experience would work to correct that. He's also 26.

Next season Tom Brady will be 32, coming off major knee surgery--surgery that does not appear to be healing as it should. Where he'll be come September, nobody knows.....but let's say for the purposes of this argument his health remains uncertain as next season rolls around.

Don't misunderstand--I don't for a second underestimate Tom Brady. He has clearly been one of the best QBs of all time, and could (should?) have several top-level years ahead of him. I would also suggest that he might be one of the few guys who should be retained simply for the purpose of sustaining the integrity of the franchise--meaning, for pursposes of history, emotion, etc. But I'm not sure that's the way BB will ever do business, with the possible exception of keeping Troy Brown last year, which obviously didn't mean much.

Belichick and the overall organization doesn't go by names, or history, or salary, or sentiment. He and they go by what they see in front of them, and act in whatever way is in the best interests of the team.

So my question to the board is, come next year, is it possible that the Pats would be better off with Matt Cassel than Tom Brady? And if so, what should the Pats do about it?

And yup....here in 2012, can't say I feel bad about a single word there. If you don't think Bill Belichick is perpetually analyzing EVERY element of his team, then....well, you're wrong. He has and he does. Also, pretty clear there's no "fans that wanted to keep Cassel" in this post, and not many anywhere as far as I recall. Mostly just...what do you call it? Oh right. Discussion. In theory. But what I mostly remember then--and reinforced now--is a frantic hysteria most akin to Islamlic fundamentalists from those posting then. And now.

Other than that, good going, guys!

 

[BradyFTW!]

Hey, sorry I've been late to this. Yup, my post which started all the hyperventilating and vapors around here.........

Let me start by saying until this year I can't remember the last time I missed a Pats' game, but due to unprecedented business travelling, I've missed a bunch.....so I acknowledge at the outset I haven't seen Cassel play nearly as much as I would like.

Having said that, what I saw against the Jets was a confident, energetic, very impressive performance from Cassel. He threw the ball well, led the team, moved extremely well (his scrambling ability is obviously better than Brady's), and overall did an outstanding job. In the few areas he seemed off--eg, the deep ball--I sensed that a little more experience would work to correct that. He's also 26.

Next season Tom Brady will be 32, coming off major knee surgery--surgery that does not appear to be healing as it should. Where he'll be come September, nobody knows.....but let's say for the purposes of this argument his health remains uncertain as next season rolls around.

Don't misunderstand--I don't for a second underestimate Tom Brady. He has clearly been one of the best QBs of all time, and could (should?) have several top-level years ahead of him. I would also suggest that he might be one of the few guys who should be retained simply for the purpose of sustaining the integrity of the franchise--meaning, for pursposes of history, emotion, etc. But I'm not sure that's the way BB will ever do business, with the possible exception of keeping Troy Brown last year, which obviously didn't mean much.

Belichick and the overall organization doesn't go by names, or history, or salary, or sentiment. He and they go by what they see in front of them, and act in whatever way is in the best interests of the team.

So my question to the board is, come next year, is it possible that the Pats would be better off with Matt Cassel than Tom Brady? And if so, what should the Pats do about it?

And yup....here in 2012, can't say I feel bad about a single word there. If you don't think Bill Belichick is perpetually analyzing EVERY element of his team, then....well, you're wrong. He has and he does. Also, pretty clear there's no "fans that wanted to keep Cassel" in this post, and not many anywhere as far as I recall. Mostly just...what do you call it? Oh right. Discussion. In theory. But what I mostly remember then--and reinforced now--is a frantic hysteria most akin to Islamlic fundamentalists from those posting then. And now.

Other than that, good going, guys!

There were plenty of people who openly believed that Cassel would be more valuable to the team going forward. I remember a few of them, though it wouldn't be polite to name names, at this point.

Bottom line: nobody ever had an inherent problem with discussion. Most of us had a problem with the reasoning skills of anyone who could conclude that Cassel was likely to have a better career, going forward, than Tom Brady. Most of us were just about certain that things would play out more or less as they did. We were right, to say the least.

Analogy: if you said that "1 is greater than 2", telling you that you're objectively wrong wouldn't be an argument against discussion in general. It would be an argument against the the ridiculousness of that point in particular. Similarly, if there was any 'frantic hysteria', it was people laughing hysterically at anyone who was clueless enough to think that Belichick might choose Cassel over Brady.

Cassel was a better-than-league-average starter. Brady is in the discussion for best of all time. The fact that some people couldn't recognize the chasm that exists between those two skill levels boggles my mind to this day. It defies explanation. A lot of people seem to think that "we're just having a discussion" somehow shields ridiculous opinions from criticism. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to point out when it's completely indefensible and objectively wrong.

 

[aluminum seats]

I'm entitled to point out when it's completely indefensible and objectively wrong.

Read the post again. Or don't. All of what you're saying (and saying and saying) completely misses the point.

 

[PatsDeb]

nope..don't remember anyone saying that..ever..at all

All those dummies left the board years ago (or would never confess now to being one of them).

 

[Deus Irae]

....And yup....here in 2012, can't say I feel bad about a single word there.

Then you haven't learned a thing, which is sad.

If you don't think Bill Belichick is perpetually analyzing EVERY element of his team, then....well, you're wrong. He has and he does. Also, pretty clear there's no "fans that wanted to keep Cassel" in this post, and not many anywhere as far as I recall. Mostly just...what do you call it? Oh right. Discussion. In theory. But what I mostly remember then--and reinforced now--is a frantic hysteria most akin to Islamlic fundamentalists from those posting then. And now.

Yeah, that's just nonsense.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Sorry, I don't pay attention to people like that.

Exactly, this isn't even worth discussing.

 

[aluminum seats]

Yeah, that's just nonsense.

Sometimes, before posting, you should ask yourself if the random thoughts floating though your brain are really worth posting.

Because oftentimes, like here, they're not.

No need to respond, just a friendly tip.

 

[Deus Irae]

Sometimes, before posting, you should ask yourself if the random thoughts floating though your brain are really worth posting.

Because oftentimes, like here, they're not.

No need to respond, just a friendly tip.

Ahhh, but you're wrong. you see, it really was worth posting. You were spouting nonsense. It was worth posting to point it out.

Discussions about the future of the team, and the QB position, weren't the problem, and there was no "frantic hysteria most akin to Islamlic fundamentalists from those posting then". Really stupid discussions about things that had no shot to happen were the problem, and there were people pointing that out in thread after thread after thread, pre merger, and then again in the merged thread.

Take some of your own advice, because your posts on the subject back then weren't worth making, and your attempted defense of that in this thread wasn't worth posting, either.