Schefter: Expect Pats to Keep Garoppolo Beyond 2017

[XLIX]

Pure speculations of course . but ok sum up of recent contextuals..


Ben Volin of the Boston Globe writes that there’s a “nagging thought” that Tom Brady doesn’t really expect to play until he’s 45 and is instead setting everyone up for a surprise retirement either next spring or the one after.

Volin says there’s plenty of evidence that this could, in fact, be the case.

The first of which is the simple fact that the Patriots elected to hold on to backup QB Jimmy Garoppolo when he’s entering a contract year and could have been traded for a big return this offseason. On Thursday, Adam Schefter mentioned that he expects the Patriots to figure out a way to keep Garoppolo beyond the 2017 season.

Volin points out that Brady and Garoppolo share the same agent, which means Garoppolo will have a good idea of what the Patriots’ plans are moving forward.

Other indications that Brady could be preparing to transition away from the NFL, according to Volin, are the fact that he’s ramped up his off-field branding this year and the talk from his wife and family that would like him around more.

(from NFL Trade Rumors)

I don't buy that him "ramping up his off field branding" is evidence of retirement. There is no connection there.

I mean seriously.... the logic literally says "Brady signed a deal with Aston Martin, therefore this will be his final year in the NFL." Whuh huh huh?

 

[Kontradiction]

No I agree it would be unusual for him to pre-announce. Brady is a quiet, private person.
We DO have recent, repeated statements that he believes he can play to 45 and that he believes he's in top NFL condition.

You are claiming he's issuing deliberate misinformation.

I certainly don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility.

Brady's history it to be mum on controversial topics, NOT to issue continuous disinformation later refuted.

But this isn't controversial. This is about his retirement and the talk is getting louder and louder to the point that it's a distraction. He's now 40 years old and is asked about it in every interview. It's not exactly a shocking revelation if he continuously gives that number out to kill the subject. And, should that be the case, it's been effective, to date.

You folks can't restrain yourselves envisioning a soon departure of a guy who can still through, lasts a season without debilitating injuries and most of all asserts correctly that at this stage of his career he understands completely what the opposing defense is trying to do and knowns ways to counter it. I can't envision us being better off say in 2018 with a guy who has minimal NFL game experience.

"You folks", eh? I invite you to show me where I've advocated getting rid of Brady in order to start the JAG era.

FWIW I'm strongly skeptical about hime playing at 45. 3 more seasons.

So why are you debating? You just essentially admitted that my stance on the matter may not be that unrealistic.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Not really, no. JAG is Super Bowl insurance for Brady if he gets injurred, and only for as long as it is manageable. One year, maybe two, but that is what he is. That is value enough to keep him around while the team is jacked.

So you think it's possible to build a Super Bowl roster with $40M+ invested in the QB position, and you think it's possible to convince Garoppolo to sign here long term with no guarantee that he'll be starting within 2 years?

Up until the draft I was one of the stronger advocates on here for the idea that Brady is here for as long as he remains effective, and that likely meant Garoppolo was gone sooner or later, but at this point I think the Patriots' actions have shown me to be wrong. If you accept that A) it's going to take $20M+ per year to keep Garoppolo past 2017, and B) that paying TWO quarterbacks that kind of money hamstrings the Pats' ability to build a deep, talented, SB-contending team, then you don't have to read the tea leaves too hard to suggest what that means for Brady.

 

[mosslost]

I think the 2001 D was better giving up 272 points. The 2011 D gave up 342 points.

2011 team > 2001 team significntly

 

[mosslost]

So you think it's possible to build a Super Bowl roster with $40M+ invested in the QB position, and you think it's possible to convince Garoppolo to sign here long term with no guarantee that he'll be starting within 2 years?

>>within 2 years

Yes , 2 more years?, not only possible but it is entirely on the Pats to do this. More than 2 years then no. I think they let JAG walk after 1 more year frankly.

 

[mosslost]

I think the 2001 D was better giving up 272 points. The 2011 D gave up 342 points.

2011 O scored 513,

2001 an anemic 372

 

[SHOWTIME15]

2011 O scored 513,

2001 an anemic 372

2001 offense was 6th overall in points - hardly anemic compared to the rest of the league. And the 2001 D was 5th ranked.

 

[bbobbo]

Maybe the defensive line
But Linebackers were very good
Mcginest
Bruschi
Phifer
Vrabel
Cox
Secondary
Law Milloy
And Otis Smith played out of his mind.
Offense Baby Brady
Brown
Patten
Glenn for a little
Ruteledge
Smith
Compton
It wasnt a terrible team
Plus we had Adam V

even belichick didn't think the 2001 team was that good. from The Education of a Coach, chapters 12 & 13:

So they had won the first of the three Super Bowls. It was, thought their coach, something of a miracle. He had seen a lot of good football teams and coached a few of them, and this was not, in the technical sense, that good a football team. But it had played well when it mattered, and it had done the things it was supposed to do. Technically, it should have been an 8–8 or 7–9 team in the regular season, when it had a deficit in almost every statistical category. But it had scored forty-three touchdowns to only twenty-six for the opposition, and nearly one hundred more points than the other teams—a sign that when it mattered, the Patriots knew how to stop an enemy drive.

He was aware of how much luck they had enjoyed in getting to the Super Bowl, that good players had sometimes played like great players, that critical calls had gone to them (as they had not in Cleveland)—especially one against Oakland in a playoff game when a fumble on the part of Brady had been ruled an incompletion, a terrible call in the eyes of any unbiased observer. Had it gone the other way, the season would have ended then and there. He was aware that there were three or four games they had won that they could easily have lost had one critical play turned out differently. And he was aware that the one player who had made such a great difference, Tom Brady, was there mostly by luck.

They had won their first Super Bowl, but they were not that good yet. No one knew that better than the head coach. When it was over, he hugged his old friend Ernie Adams and asked him, “Can you believe we won the Super Bowl against the Rams with this team?” To his mind they had barely begun building the Patriots into a team with their kind of players and enough depth to withstand the usual expected injuries. In 2002, they were 9–7 and did not make the playoffs, but, ironically, Belichick thought they were a better team. They were still incomplete, but change was under way. He was steadily getting new players, ones more compatible with his system.

 

[sb1]

2011 team > 2001 team significntly

Only on offense imo. And I'd say they were better mostly because 2011 Brady >>>>>>> 2001 Brady. Although I'd argue that the running game was much better in 01.

The 2011 defense was trash. It was embarrassing to see the QBs they allowed to pass all over them. They beat zero good teams until the AFC Championship game... unless you call the Tebow Broncos a good team. And as we know they were lucky to even win that AFC Chammpionship game. The only reason why the SB was close is the Giants weren't much better and they lucked into the game themselves.

The 2016 Super Bowl champs would crush the 2011 team. In fact they would crush the 2011 Super Bowl champs along with them.

 

[sb1]

2011 O scored 513,

2001 an anemic 372

Different era, IMO. Hard to compare straight up.

 

[RobertWeathers]

And that would be a good time to start a Brady Trade/Retirement thread. When he is 80%.

You know the trade thread is happening at the end of the season.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

. . . we were around 76 cents below the cap. . . .

That's not as impressive as it sounds. Back then to carry cap space over you had to create a fake NLTBE clause in a contract (like giving Matt Cassel $5M if he made 10 field goals).

 

[Ivan]

Almost ten years of " time to get rid of Brady" and counting. It just doesn't get any dumber.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

FWIW I'm strongly skeptical about him playing at 45. 3 more seasons.

Which means that after the end of the 2017 season you believe he'll play only two more seasons.

So at that point is having only two more seasons of a (declining, since you think he'll only last two more seasons at that point) Brady worth losing potentially 6-8 years of Garopollo? (And thus having to play Brissett or someone who gets drafted in the next couple of years). I think that's a far less obvious choice than you do.[*]

[*] Well, since you have said you won't be watching after Brady leaves I suppose it would make the most sense for you to want the 2 years of Brady no matter what!

 

[aluminum seats]

It's happening now (sorry, forgot to hit reply to @robertweathers about Brady trade thread.)

 

[deroc5050]

I feel like the entire situation is one of the big psychological issues for us humans. Instead of enjoying whats in front of us which is a 2017 season with an amazing team some people here spend time rather dreading what will happen farther in the future.

The Patriots have a 40y QB and are essentially in a year-to-year evaluation mode of the most important position in this game. If they can keep JG around for as long as it makes economically sense and just see what happens with Brady they will do that.

It is that simple. There is no big secret succession plan or backroom agreements. They will do whats best for the football team and as long as Tom is playing at the level he is and stays uninjured he will continue to play. Despite what some people here say about things changing you are talking about the deepest character defining things of a person.. they don't change without some major trauma.

But we will get his stupid thread now every year until Brady does retire...

I think most people are going to sit back and enjoy the season. How the hell could you not, Brady should still be a top QB, we hopefully get a full year of Gronk and the new WR Cooks, Edelman and company. All these new running backs.. I am excited, **** I will be disappointed if they don't win the Super Bowl.

Which brings us to the question again after the 2017 season.. you passed up potentially a lot for a back up QB, and now what?

Its the off season and this topic is by far the most interesting topic you could possibly have.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Which means that after the end of the 2017 season you believe he'll play only two more seasons.

So at that point is having only two more seasons of a (declining, since you think he'll only last two more seasons at that point) Brady worth losing potentially 6-8 years of Garopollo? (And thus having to play Brissett or someone who gets drafted in the next couple of years). I think that's a far less obvious choice than you do.[*]

[*] Well, since you have said you won't be watching after Brady leaves I suppose it would make the most sense for you to want the 2 years of Brady no matter what!

One of your unstated fallacies is that you take JAG as a franchise or better QB as a given. Could be. But far from a given.
I'm guessing that maybe 2 more rings over 3 seasons is enough to quench Brady's GOAT drive.

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

Eh. I don't think the Pats would be ready to ship him out if he's still playing like the GOAT. I still think it's much more likely that Brady plans to retire than it is that the Pats are forcing him out the door. If I'm wrong about that, it's going to take me a LONG time to get over it. Forcing Brady out the door (and to another team) while he's still at the top of the game would be a massive mistake.

It would hurt even more if Brady won a superbowl the year being traded with another team. Brady is the GOAT and always plays with a chip on his shoulder. Imagine Brady being traded and unhappy and goes 11-5 with another team (plausible) and wins the SB?

Its why you need to be so careful with trading him before he declines.

 

[CutiePie]

i am thrilled about the fact that BB thinks Jimmy G is the successor

another decade or so of dominance is on the way

brady is the GOAT and he has made the patriots what they are

but time waits for no man.....and he has 2 years, tops, as the patriots QB

just cutie pie's opinion

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

i am thrilled about the fact that BB thinks Jimmy G is the successor

another decade or so of dominance is on the way

brady is the GOAT and he has made the patriots what they are

but time waits for no man.....and he has 2 years, tops, as the patriots QB

just cutie pie's opinion

I haven't seen enough of Jimmy G to convince me we will have 10 more years of dominance. I could very well see us being "pretty good", so 9-7 - 11-5 for 3 seasons until BB retires and then slowly fade into a 6 win team with Jimmy.

You just never know.