Would You Have Stidham as QB2, Or Take the Pressure Off?

[Soliel]

I don’t have enough time watching yet to call this one. Stidham looks pretty good but Hoyer brings a lot to the table. Hard call with only two junk games so far

 

[Flash]

From most reports, Hoyer has high football IQ and is very valuable during practices and film sessions. I don't see any reason why we should cut Hoyer, at the minimum the guy can serve as a mentor to Stidham, in addition to being one of the better backup QBs in the league. We've carried three QBs before, no reason not to do it again.

 

[Zuma]

 

[patfanken]

How many NFL games have you seen Jarrett play in for you to make that assertion? How many games will he play in by midseason to make him be well ahead?

Now really like Stidham, but the kid has never played against a starting NFL defense, and yet so many are ready to risk an entire season just to keep the #53 guy on the roster?

It's a legit question. Right now I'm still on the 3 QB side, but I'm questioning myself all the time. The situation isn't much different from 2009 when BB kept an UDFA rookie as Brady's back up a year after Brady was lost for the season with an ACL. Borges must have been hammering Bill over that.

It would be interesting to go back into the archives and pull out a few threads from THAT cut down day.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

IF Brady sustains an injury, we will run the ball, PUNT* a lot, and play defense.


(* = new punter appears to be pretty good)

 

[ctpatsfan77]

An important point to note: while the Patriots are evaluating Stidham, they don't really need to do that with Hoyer. They're using him to evaluate the other players on the field.

As a simple example, look at 2008. It was basically a given that Cassel looked abysmal in the preseason and was going to get cut.

 

[supafly]

I don’t have enough time watching yet to call this one. Stidham looks pretty good but Hoyer brings a lot to the table. Hard call with only two junk games so far

I think it’s better to err on the side of caution, meaning that it’s a 3 QB year.

Stidham has looked promising at times for a rookie, but let’s not kid ourselves with delusions that he’s going to be the permanent backup QB. I think that would be stupid.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Not sure where to put this but Garropolo put up a 0.00 passer rating recently. 3 series, 1/6, 1 int, and another int dropped right to a defender's chest.

.

 

[Uptown]

We’ll see how it plays out..

 

[supafly]

We’ll see how it plays out..

Two thoughts:

1) that’s nuts

2) expect next year’s 4th rounder to be traded

 

[Simpelton]

How many NFL games have you seen Jarrett play in for you to make that assertion? How many games will he play in by midseason to make him be well ahead?

His assessment isn't based on Stidham's current skill, but on Hoyer's lack of skill. Hoyer is smart and crafty and a film room fanatic but the physical talents just aren't there for him to be more than an emergency option.

Brady is amazing but he's still getting older and you need a backup who's ready to bail the team out in case something happens. For all Hoyer's hard work in the film room, he really can't be that guy. Not long term.

The reason people are intrigued by Stidham is because either Stidham or Hoyer are only going to be playing regularly if something catastrophic happens to Brady. If that does happen, IMHO that's an instant lost season. At least in the sense that Superbowls aren't happening without TB12 under center.

That being the case, would you rather roll with the brilliant but feeble Hoyer and try to salvage the last shreds of hope for one season, or have a promising kid you can develop and give live snaps to in the hopes that he can grow into the role for that year and beyond? I think the upside argument strongly favors the latter option.

I'd like to keep Hoyer around as a coach or scout but can we really trust him to hold the team together if TB12 actually does go down? Or even be able to play every week without physical problems?

It seems to me that Hoyer is just as much of an unknown as Stidham right now, but with less than half the upside.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

His assessment isn't based on Stidham's current skill, but on Hoyer's lack of skill. Hoyer is smart and crafty and a film room fanatic but the physical talents just aren't there for him to be more than an emergency option.

Hoyer led a 26-point comeback with the Browns. On the road.

 

[Simpelton]

Hoyer led a 26-point comeback with the Browns. On the road.

5 years ago. That's an eternity for a quarterback, especially one who wasn't ever all that talented to begin with

I mean if we're basing our quarterbacking decisions on guys who used to be good, we should sign Drew Bledsoe to be the backup, he used to be very, very good

 

[SBLIII]

Hoyer led a 26-point comeback with the Browns. On the road.

1994?

 

[tasmlab]

2006-08: Cassel
2009-11: Hoyer
2011-13: Mallett
2014-17: Garoppolo
2016: Brisket
2017-present: Hoyer
2019-present: Stidham

Every backup on that list (except Stidham) would be named a starting QB at some point. Does that happen with any other NFL team?

 

[Clonamery]

Every backup on that list (except Stidham) would be named a starting QB at some point. Does that happen with any other NFL team?

They get the best coaching in NE.

 

[Simpelton]

Every backup on that list (except Stidham) would be named a starting QB at some point. Does that happen with any other NFL team?

Brissett was technically never named a starting QB. He was filling in for Luck as a longterm backup

 

[Zuma]

Let's say that QB2 in general works more closely with QB1 and the weekly game plan then does QB3. If that's the case then it's safe to say that having Hoyer on the team could potentially slow down Stidham's growth as a QB. We could also say what if Tom suddenly retired after this season for whatever reason...and if Stidham is the starter...it's possible he will have less success in 2020 because Hoyer was QB2 in 2019...although I think Hoyer would be a fantastic backup to Stidham in 2020 in this scenario. Do they resign Hoyer for 2020 and he starts or roll the dice with Stidham? I don't think Tom retires after this season...but anything is possible.

 

[Kasmir]

Brissett was technically never named a starting QB. He was filling in for Luck as a longterm backup

He also started the 4th game of Brady's suspension.

 

[zydecochris]

Now really like Stidham, but the kid has never played against a starting NFL defense, and yet so many are ready to risk an entire season just to keep the #53 guy on the roster?

It's a legit question. Right now I'm still on the 3 QB side, but I'm questioning myself all the time. The situation isn't much different from 2009 when BB kept an UDFA rookie as Brady's back up a year after Brady was lost for the season with an ACL. Borges must have been hammering Bill over that.

It would be interesting to go back into the archives and pull out a few threads from THAT cut down day.

I think we need to keep 3 QB and not throw Stidham to the wolves yet in a real NFL game. It occurs to me that some of the best young QBs in the NFL were able to be an effective starter almost immediately, and with some it took them a couple of years at least to get going.

Who are some of the QBs who were able to be effective NFL starters right away as a rookie? Some of the most effective NFL QBs as rookies are:

• Baker Mayfield
• Deshaun Watson
• Zac Prescott

What do all of these QBs have in common? They all absolutely set the college football world on fire their last year in college, a Heisman trophy and numbers records for Mayfield, a National Championship (against a great defense) for Watson, and Prescott absolutely terrorized the SEC on a Mississippi St. team that had little talent except for him. Incidentally, all three were idolized by their teammates.

How about some good young NFL QBs who did not excel as rookies? Some of them include:

• Jared Goff
• Mitchell Trubisky
• Josh Rosen

What do these QBs have in common? None of them really had stunningly standout years in their last year in college.

Although there may be exceptions to the rule (for example, Wentz played pretty well as a rookie despite a lackluster college career), it would seem that players that set the college football world on fire their last year are more prepared to play QB as rookies. With other players it perhaps takes a few years to be ready.

What does this have to do with Stidham? Despite showing flashes of arm talent, he really had a bit of a disappointing senior year at Auburn, showing little pocket presence and definitely having a happy feet problem. So far I'm dazzled (and pleasently surprised) at how well he is playing for the Patriots, maybe with the proper coaching (which he probably didn't get at Auburn) he can turn into a steal for the Patriots. However, let's not jettison Hoyer and throw this inexperience rookie to the wolves in the the first time Brady gets some type of injury. Let's give Stidham a year or so to learn the ropes first, and see if we have struck gold (or silver, at least).