The win-win-win situation for NE, Tom, and Matt

[j00fek]

when will these worthless posts be locked and removed?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Can he play a few games Sep 2009 if he really needs to?

We'll find out in a few months what the Pats think about this.

Also, what will our schedule be the first 4-6 games. We should have a tough 2009 schedule.

Unfortunately, we'll be several weeks into FA before the schedule is released.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

One, signing Matt, tagged or not, would tie up a disproportionate amount of Cap room at QB, when we have holes to fill and when we might want to cut early deals with players whose contracts are up. I don't think tying that much money up at QB is in the best interests of the Franchise.

Two, arguing that Matt's value would go up is an assumption but not a certainty. Also, given the risk of career-ending or career-limiting injury every game, it makes no economic sense for Matt Cassell to do anything other than ink a multi-year deal ASAP, if the Pats don't tag him. So, I don't think this is in Matt's best interest.

Three, in an ideal world, Brady and Cassel would be singing Kumbya. But these are competitive guys and, at some point, there would be strains on relationships and possibly performance, no matter how great BB's coaching and no matter how well-intentioned everyone was. So, I don't think it's in Brady's best interest.

(Suggestion: someone else put in "zzzzzzzzzzzz,"which I won't do, but you could try to boil your points down or limit them to a few rather than many. I'm sure you wrote some things that I skimmed or missed because it was just tooooooooo long. There are very few folks out here who have earned the right to post something real long and expect the rest of us to read it all.)

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

His "value" could be enhanced in a narrower sense.

Let's say MC gets franchised. Super Bowl caliber teams (for next year) like Tampa or Philly only need QB to be a legit contender.

Since the Pats hold the player they get to act as an "agent" or a gate keeper.

Ofcourse, this all depends on teams only needing a QB to compete for a Super Bowl in 2009/2010 and they have something of value (draft picks), and MC is willing/able to negotiate a long term deal.

I would say this can only work with a QB who is all pro NFL ready.

 

[PatSunday]

Here's a handy internet flowchart for your future reference:

Read -> Comprehend -> Post.

For the last time, this is clearly not about trading Brady. You're the one who is not reading because you're just quoting 1 line of text out of context. The entire post and my replies, and everybody elses replies, are about trading Cassel now, versus keeping him for a lower price than franchising him, and then trading Cassel the following year, in order to develop him some more for his own benefit (and maybe a ring) and also to give Brady a bit more time to recover. You have zero comprehension skills and just don't want to drop the issue.

 

[PatSunday]

You get the roll eyes from other posters (who habitually post intelligent and reasoned analysis) because this is a stupid thread based on a total misunderstanding of the NFL, the CBA, the cap, and professional athletes. Other than that, good job

Then stop bumping this up please. That's not true, and nobody asked you to post in here, in a "non-expert" question that is beneath you. Members have found and posted some holes in my post and I've agreed about them already in a previous page, after an intelligent and reasoned discussion.

There's no reason to try to bring negativity and exaggerations, as we're not all godly experts on the Patriots or professional franchises, nor do I think we should be expected to be.

I request this thread closed as I don't foresee any further intelligent, on-topic comments than what was provided as feedback already.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

I request this thread closed

Good enough for me! Happy to oblige.