The 3-year transition Brady/Garoppollo theory - is there any merit?

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Vrabel, Moss, and Mankins had just crossed the line starting their decline, and Welker and Seymour both wanted big new deals they weren't going to get so I don't think they are analogous, Brady has actually been getting better and his value is off the charts, he's the best player in football and nowhere near the top in pay. He's also sacrificed like no one else in sports to give them the leeway to build around him, and he's a big reason they have been able to build the team they have right now.

I don't dismiss Belichick's willingness to move on from players I just think Brady's play makes that decision much much harder than anyone else. Even if Brady threw 10 interceptions next season I doubt there is anyone he or we would want at QB with the season on the line. You can't teach clutch it's in a players make up, and gambling that someone else will replace that is a huge bet to make:

I don't disagree with you regarding Brady's current value and his status as unlike any other player, or that his clutch play is a big factor.

 

[sb1]

How do you account for the experts?

Stephen smith said Brady is eighteen months from the cliff

Kellerman says he is already burnt

Shannon sharpe said he is washed up.


Can u explain this?

The only "expert" that matters is BB.

Other than that, the only difference between those guys and regular fans is they get paid for their opinions.

 

[Soliel]

I agree... I do not like the experts.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

How do you account for the experts?
Stephen smith said Brady is eighteen months from the cliff
Kellerman says he is already burnt
Shannon sharpe said he is washed up.


Can u explain this?

Yes, they are Morons.

Apologies to the several Patsfan morons posting in this thread. There's a degree of moronity

 

[Simpelton]

As a certified moron, your apology is accepted.

For the record I feel comfortable in saying -- there are no Brady haters in this thread. Ivan's crazy narrative where everyone is a "hater" who doesn't proclaim Tom Brady the Very God Almighty, Eternal and Forever notwithstanding.

Some of us do recognize that Brady is what he is -- an amazing player who's a forseeable distance away from his sell by date, and that that has implications that the franchise and its fans probably need to be thinking about at this point. That's not hate. It's determination to see this franchise outlive the deprature of a player whose departure is going to be catastrophic whenever it happens.

No one is arguing that it's going to be anything other than a catastrophe to lose Brady. Some of us are arguing that bringing that catastrophe about at a time of our choosing, when we can control the outcome and have a replacement in hand, simply seems less idiotic than letting it happen whenever it's going to happen on its own with no better plan than "we'll figure it out as we go."

 

[Ivan]

I'm more than happy to let this play out. I'll take Brady for at least two more Lombardi's.

 

[Simpelton]

I'm happy to let this play out as long as "this" is a reasonable transition plan that gets the most out of Brady that it's possible to get without sacrificing the post-Brady future of this franchise.

 

[Gronk]

I'm happy to let this play out as long as "this" is a reasonable transition plan that gets the most out of Brady that it's possible to get without sacrificing the post-Brady future of this franchise.

Just a question, and no judgment either way - but what if it appears that getting the most out of Brady would involve sacrificing the likely "prime" of JG's career. For arguments sake let's be super-optimistic and say Brady stays more or less the same, and the team remains annually SB-level good, for the next 5 years. We all assume Brady will remain in place for 2017. 2018-2021 are JG's age 27-31 years. This is the likely "prime" of a non-HOF level QB (i.e. few play at their best before and after that age range). Father Time is unbeaten, and if you bet on him catching up to Tom in that time frame, I cannot blame you. History is on your side. But it's not totally unrealistic to suggest that he's set his body clock back 3-5 years with his diet and physical conditioning. It's already evident, in fact.

Add onto that the fact that TB has played almost entirely in an era that does protect the QBs considerably more than in the past. He's taken some good beatings (e.g. '15 AFCCG, still a top 5 TB game to me even in an L that he had them on the brink of coming back there) and I think at least for people who would read this forum we cringe every time he's touched more than is necessary, and there's some sort of skill/luck/style blend involved in avoiding injury, but the odds are somewhat stacked in a QBs favor against taking bodyslam a la Jim McMahon from the Packers or getting routinely concussed (for different reasons) a la a mobile Steve Young or stationary Troy Aikman.

So, question being - all evidence seen thus far, who would you bet on being more likely to carry the NEP to the SB title from 2018-2021? Tom Brady or Jimmy Garroppolo? Personally I think this is the question BB has to answer. I think it's obvious, but I of course remain respectful of those who disagree.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Here are things of which nobody is certain:

1) The age at which Tom Brady will not be the best option
2) therefore, the date of "A year early"
3) Whether "better a year early than a year late" applies to TB in BB's world.
4) Whether JG is "injury prone" or whether he just got injured that one time.
5) What BB thinks of all of this, given that these are uncertainties in his present, other than consideration (3).
6) What BB "saw" getting JG ready for the 4-game suspension. Was it "Holy crap, lightning in a bottle twice?" Or was it, "He'll do, worst case, 2-2" or was it "This kid makes me nervous. F**** Roger Goodell"?

I loved the OP. Traitorous as I feel typing it, I love that TB becomes cheaper to cut as the years in his deal play out.

I don't buy the idea that Brady has cracked the code to play until age 45, no questions asked, at a high level. I think Brady works to do that (and more), that he's dedicated himself to it, that his body is a temple, and that he thinks he found some goddam rare kiwi that generates growth in telomeres and slows the aging process. FINE.

But we all love TFB here. we're pre-disposed to think he's beaten aging. We'll only know one way, and that'll be unpleasant.

3 years? 1 year? 5 years? I don't envy Belichick.

I agree with TB's father (and I believe I said it here before he said it publicly, but I might be wrong,) that TB's view of his own value might differ from BB's view of TB's value. Or, BB might roll the dice. Call him into the office, say it's been an amazing run, go out there and prove I was wrong... but I think we're at the "better a year too early" date. Talk about nothing you can do about it... being told you're scrapped for how you're GOING to suck...

Now all that said - and as the OP admits - this is a big weltering mess of unknowns. Actually I hate posting in the off-season in general, because what we're really trying to do is model Bill Belichick's brain half the time, and this primitive planet - the whole planet working together - has trouble with a comparatively simple model, like I dunno, the climate or how dark matter interacts with the stuff that we know about. I was never even a good poker player, frankly, and that's when you have a guy sitting right in front of you and you have statistical knowledge of the likelihood of given hands. You really think our modeling is going to be accurate? Well one of us will be right, that's for sure. And the OP put together a scenario very consistent with the "knowns" in the equation, from the contracts, so kudos.

Nature abhors a vacuum and bulletin boards abhor informational vacuums, and generally we abhor each other for disagreeing with one anothers' "crystal balls."

I do see a lot of posts based on wish fulfillment, especially on how Brady is a special case. He won't decline for years, for certain, because he has this training regimen see... well I'm inclined to believe this too, but I have to keep checking myself. We also are at a disadvantage... we have never seen Tom Brady traded. We have never seen Tom Brady retire. It's hard to imagine.

TB is an unknown at 3 years (or 1 bad hit) out. JG is an unknown. Brissett? Come on man.

And of course BB's mind is the ultimate unknown. What does he think he has in JG? Something to ditch his partner for, b/c that's what they've been for 15 years, partners.... based on a general knowledge of the effect of aging in the fifth decade of life? He's seen a lot of QBs - did he see something that special?

I'm staying tuned and enjoying 2017. Oh but 1 more thing...

Having this "hanging over" a player is the Patriot Way. They've got a way of taking the negatives in football, saying that is really tough but it's reality, and turning it into a positive (i.e., everybody has to fight for their job... guess what Tom, that means you too now. I mean props for the 5 rings and all, but this kid looks ready to go.)

Better stay sharp!

Okay all done

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I think everything comes down to how Brady plays in 2017. If he continues to play at a very high level, then bb restructures/extends him after the season.

If his plays drops, bb trades him to San Fran and jimmy takes over in 2018.

Brady is not going to have a gentle decline. It will be steep and it will be sudden. However I think it will begin several years from now.

 

[Ivan]

Just a question, and no judgment either way - but what if it appears that getting the most out of Brady would involve sacrificing the likely "prime" of JG's career. For arguments sake let's be super-optimistic and say Brady stays more or less the same, and the team remains annually SB-level good, for the next 5 years. We all assume Brady will remain in place for 2017. 2018-2021 are JG's age 27-31 years. This is the likely "prime" of a non-HOF level QB (i.e. few play at their best before and after that age range). Father Time is unbeaten, and if you bet on him catching up to Tom in that time frame, I cannot blame you. History is on your side. But it's not totally unrealistic to suggest that he's set his body clock back 3-5 years with his diet and physical conditioning. It's already evident, in fact.

Add onto that the fact that TB has played almost entirely in an era that does protect the QBs considerably more than in the past. He's taken some good beatings (e.g. '15 AFCCG, still a top 5 TB game to me even in an L that he had them on the brink of coming back there) and I think at least for people who would read this forum we cringe every time he's touched more than is necessary, and there's some sort of skill/luck/style blend involved in avoiding injury, but the odds are somewhat stacked in a QBs favor against taking bodyslam a la Jim McMahon from the Packers or getting routinely concussed (for different reasons) a la a mobile Steve Young or stationary Troy Aikman.

So, question being - all evidence seen thus far, who would you bet on being more likely to carry the NEP to the SB title from 2018-2021? Tom Brady or Jimmy Garroppolo? Personally I think this is the question BB has to answer. I think it's obvious, but I of course remain respectful of those who disagree.

I'll respond as I did in an earlier post, Steve Young, Aaron Rodgers, and Andrew Luck have 2 Lombardi's between all 3 of them. Tom Brady has 2 Lombardi's since a large portion of Patriot Nation melted down in early 2014 and wanted him traded.

The Patriots were favored to win the Super Bowl on March 1st of this year, and that was with almost half of their team heading to free agency and Belichick expected to be frugal in free agency. Who do you think the oddsmakers were betting on?

Hint-it wasn't Jimmy Garrapolo.

Now Belichick has loaded them up for the next couple of years and they are even heavier favorites to win it all. It's no guarantee as the SB never is, but I love Brady's chances to get them another Lombardi in 2018, and at least one more after that. And imo it's possible they could ultimately end up with more.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I think a few posts ago said it best: Losing Tom Brady will be an unquestionable, unarguable catastrophe. But it's better for the team to experience that catastrophe at a time of its own choosing then whenever.

 

[Simpelton]

I'll respond as I did in an earlier post, Steve Young, Aaron Rodgers, and Andrew Luck have 2 Lombardi's between all 3 of them. Tom Brady has 2 Lombardi's since a large portion of Patriot Nation melted down in early 2014 and wanted him traded.

The Patriots were favored to win the Super Bowl on March 1st of this year, and that was with almost half of their team heading to free agency and Belichick expected to be frugal in free agency. Who do you think the oddsmakers were betting on?

Hint-it wasn't Jimmy Garrapolo.

Now Belichick has loaded them up for the next couple of years and they are even heavier favorites to win it all. It's no guarantee as the SB never is, but I love Brady's chances to get them another Lombardi in 2018, and at least one more after that. And imo it's possible they could ultimately end up with more.

there's far more to this equation than discussing the comparative strengths of the Patriots, Packers, and 49ers as overall franchises -- which is all a comparison of the hardware proves.

The fact of the matter is that the only franchise of the three that suffered directly for its choice to move on from its superstar quarterback was the Colts, and they did that deliberately to tank (there is no other word for what the Colts were doing that year) for the best quarterback prospect they could possibly get their hands on.

Manning, Favre, and Montana were moved on from as a result of carefully orchestrated plans that the front office of their franchises decided on despite these front offices knowing darn well that each of them had years of life left in them. All of Montana, Favre and Manning took franchises to the playoffs and Manning took his team all the way.

And in each case, the franchise that cut them executed its plan and was back in the playoffs, if not that year, within a few years. And only the Colts, the weakest of the three franchises at the time, don't have any hardware to show for it.

And anyone here actually expects this Patriots franchise, known as the great master of contingency planning and treating players like plug and play devices based on Bill Belichick's scouting priorities, has no plan to move on from Brady to a viable replacement whether or not Brady has a few years of life left? The history of the way these things go between franchises and their aging-but-still-great quarterbacks disagrees with you.

This is what history tells us. History tells us that if a franchise thinks it can still put up a fight in the league after its premium elite quarterback has moved on, it will not rest on its laurels and ride its aging superstar back down to ground floor level. It will execute a plan, bring in a replacement, and try to keep winning. If the plan fails, it fails, but there will be a plan, and rather than risk even one year of unprofitable mediocricy, the franchise will cut or trade the aging superstar and execute the plan and the superstar will wind up with a few wilderness years at the end of his career. It happened to some of the best quarterbacks of our generation and some of the best quarterbacks of past generations. I see no real reason to think that Brady will be different here. Just because he's exceptional doesn't make him an exception.

 

[patsfan13]

And the results of the marvelously executed plans which involve putting at least 2 HOF QB's in place to replace 3 HOF QB's?

2 SB appearances/wins, this is of course what Brady has accomplished in the past 3 years.


I will ask again Since it is a fact that Brady has progressed physically in each of the past 3 years, why do people project him falling off prior to say 4-5 years from now?

Why are the PAtriots talking to Brady about a 2-3 year extension BEYOND his current contract, perhaps BB judgement is different than the armchair GM/JG fanboys here.

With the roster management by BB why would Brady win another 2 SB's in say the next 4 years?

Are we comparing JG to S Young, or Rogers?

 

[Simpelton]

And the results of the marvelously executed plans which involve putting at least 2 HOF QB's in place to replace 3 HOF QB's?

2 SB appearances/wins, this is of course what Brady has accomplished in the past 3 years.

And that almost matters. But the fact of the matter is that those replacements, with the possible exception of Andrew Luck, are Hall of Famers that extended their team's ability to compete for playoffs, win games, and fill stadiums beyond the years the superstar could be expected to do so. So we turn to the discussion of Garoppolo, and how well a 25 year old will fill stadiums in 2027 compared to whatever we can scrape together if we play Brady out to the bitter end and then, and only then, worry about replacing him.

Because if we do wait too long, we run the risk of what happened the NEXT time the 49ers needed to replace their quarterback.

That's why when you have a viable starting caliber quarterback behind your aging superstar, you spend a good long time having a think about whether and when to move to the young starter no matter how good the aging superstar still is because if you hold on too long, the result is years of mediocricy nearly every time. In a way the 49er franchise STILL hasn't recovered from kicking the Steve Young transition plan a year or two too far down the road.

If Garoppolo is at least good enough to get the Patriots to the playoffs, that's good enough to trigger a decision being made here. And if the decision made is not to move on, I'm sure the Patriots will step up other efforts to have a viable replacement handy. The days of the Brady's backup being the cushiest assignment in the NFL are over at this point. but this is a controversy that won't go away until Brady does, however many years into the future that happens.

 

[patsfan13]

Well the Niners went to Garcia and went to the playoffs a lot. BTW Montana and Manning were breaking down due to serious injuries. Rogers had passed Favre physically (plus Favre wasn't a film junkie and was never close to a guy like Brady mentally).

So the comparisons are apples and oranges.

AGAIN dealing with the facts and what has been reported. BRADY is still improving physically. That will change at some point but not yet.

The PAtriots are talking with Yee about an extension WHY are they doing THAT?

I understand your reluctance to discuss that since it contradicts your narrative.

 

[Ivan]

And that almost matters. But the fact of the matter is that those replacements, with the possible exception of Andrew Luck, are Hall of Famers that extended their team's ability to compete for playoffs, win games, and fill stadiums beyond the years the superstar could be expected to do so. So we turn to the discussion of Garoppolo, and how well a 25 year old will fill stadiums in 2027 compared to whatever we can scrape together if we play Brady out to the bitter end and then, and only then, worry about replacing him.

Because if we do wait too long, we run the risk of what happened the NEXT time the 49ers needed to replace their quarterback.

That's why when you have a viable starting caliber quarterback behind your aging superstar, you spend a good long time having a think about whether and when to move to the young starter no matter how good the aging superstar still is because if you hold on too long, the result is years of mediocricy nearly every time. In a way the 49er franchise STILL hasn't recovered from kicking the Steve Young transition plan a year or two too far down the road.

If Garoppolo is at least good enough to get the Patriots to the playoffs, that's good enough to trigger a decision being made here. And if the decision made is not to move on, I'm sure the Patriots will step up other efforts to have a viable replacement handy. The days of the Brady's backup being the cushiest assignment in the NFL are over at this point. but this is a controversy that won't go away until Brady does, however many years into the future that happens.

Brady winning 2 of the last 3 Super Bowls isn't good enough to keep his job, but Jimmy Garrapolo just getting them to the playoffs is good enough to keep him as QB for the next 10-15 years.

You can't make this sh.t up, it's that stupid.

 

[Soliel]

Jg is an ok qb... He is not durable. In four games, both backups were injured.

 

[sb1]

Jg is an ok qb... He is not durable. In four games, both backups were injured.

I think he can be an excellent QB. The biggest red flags for me on JG are the facts that 1) one decent hit put him out of commission and then he was not able to go vs Buffalo (and by all reports the team expected that he would be able) when his other backup really had no business playing with his hand injury and 2) 8 sacks in 94 career pass attempts. That's not RG3 sack prone but it's not something that should be written off either.

And that is with teams having no tape on him at all.He must get better at detecting the rush, get the ball away safely and not take sacks, learn when to take risks and when not to and how to take a hit safely at the pro level.

If he is the heir to Brady I don't want to see him be our Rob Johnson.

 

[Doctor DDS]

Favre was threatening retirement every off season at that point and Young had already played as well as Montana during his injury absences. Manning was coming off a significant neck injury and they happened to have the top QB prospect in a decade staring them in the face. Brady has openly expressed a desire to play for several more years and has shown the health and performance to date to make that highly plausible. If Brady had been out for half the season and JG had played as well as he did for his 6 quarters and showed the ability to handle all situations that came at him then the conversation may be closer to what SF went through but even then I doubt it. I really like Jimmy G but the timing of this situation is unfortunately for him not in his favor.