Jump to content

Nightmare scenario at QB in off season(Sign Brady)


OILERMAN

Recommended Posts

On 12/3/2019 at 10:44 AM, bizzyeddie said:

They would have to draft a rookie in the first round to sit behind Brady for a year or 2 at the most.

I don't guess that would be terrible.

We still need to be drafting a rookie if we re-sign Tannihill. His injury history is as bad as MMs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Listening to Kuharsky last night he was over the top in regards to the Titans going after Tom Brady if he tests free agency after the season. He said you go after him over anyone.    I would

Don't want a washed up Rivers either.   At this point.....   Brady and Rivers are.....   Fools gold,nothing more.

It's not an established fact that she said play MM.  It's board conjecture.

2 hours ago, Callidus said:

Bernard pollard, is that you? We have seen the pats play multiple types of offenses over his career,  this is stupid.

I might think peyton is the goat and Brady is 2 but calling him a system qb is just asinine. 

 

 

There were at least 10 to 15 quarterbacks at a given time who could have done the exact same things under the same circumstances with the Patriots..  The Patriots don't fall off the earth when Brady has been out of action. They won 11 games with Matt Cassell lol. What was Cassell's win percentage as a starter outside of that year with NE? Of course Brady had the benefit of being at the right place at the right time which has greatly embellished his reputation beyond what it deserves with the tuck rule, Seattle inexplicably throwing on the goal line and Atlanta not running the ball in the second half. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hyperion said:

 

 

There were at least 10 to 15 quarterbacks at a given time who could have done the exact same things under the same circumstances with the Patriots..  The Patriots don't fall off the earth when Brady has been out of action. They won 11 games with Matt Cassell lol. What was Cassell's win percentage as a starter outside of that year with NE? Of course Brady had the benefit of being at the right place at the right time which has greatly embellished his reputation beyond what it deserves with the tuck rule, Seattle inexplicably throwing on the goal line and Atlanta not running the ball in the second half. 

 

I'm trying to disagree with you, but it's difficult. I've always said that at least 3 or even 4 of Brady's Super Bowl appearances deserve to have asterisks beside them if for no other reason or principle than playing in this era. Also, the Patriots have proven that they'll do whatever they need in order to get over on the rest of the league.

 

That being said, you saying that Brady is an interchangeable cog is as ridiculous as saying that the Patriots Super Bowl appearances on this side of 2010 were all as legit as the ones on the other side of it. Even if you discount all of the Super Bowls post-2010 Brady is probably still a top 5 QB all time. You're overshooting your point by a country mile bringing up Cassel. There's not a chance in heaven or hell that guy would ever have sniffed the kind of success with the Patriots that Brady has had. Also, you should probably name those 10 to 15 QBs who could have done the same exact things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2019 at 7:55 AM, OILERMAN said:

 

Scine knows Amy didn't force MM into the line-up

Where did this line of thinking come from? I thought you were pretty sure she was forcing him in. You think it was vrabel the whole time? JRob

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

I'm trying to disagree with you, but it's difficult. I've always said that at least 3 or even 4 of Brady's Super Bowl appearances deserve to have asterisks beside them if for no other reason or principle than playing in this era. Also, the Patriots have proven that they'll do whatever they need in order to get over on the rest of the league.

 

That being said, you saying that Brady is an interchangeable cog is as ridiculous as saying that the Patriots Super Bowl appearances on this side of 2010 were all as legit as the ones on the other side of it. Even if you discount all of the Super Bowls post-2010 Brady is probably still a top 5 QB all time. You're overshooting your point by a country mile bringing up Cassel. There's not a chance in heaven or hell that guy would ever have sniffed the kind of success with the Patriots that Brady has had. Also, you should probably name those 10 to 15 QBs who could have done the same exact things.

 

I never said Cassell would have had the same success but the strength of the Belichick system is shown by the fact that he could win 11 games with Cassell when Cassell never played meaningful college football and was basically trash anywhere else he played in the NFL.  Obviously Belichick has designed his system to basically be a dystopia where everyone is replaceable. Why would the quarterback, the most important position on the team be any different in such a system?

 

 I do believe the top 15 or so QBs all would have won multiple Super Bowls in New England over the same time frame. I do believe there is a significant difference between Drew Brees and Matt Cassell. So off the top of my head let me name the quarterbacks who all would have done comparably as good over a period of time as Brady with the same opportunity and built in  advantages: Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Eli Manning, Tony Romo, Russell Wilson, hell maybe even Joe Flacco.

 

Of course I don't believe in the legitimacy of the Patriots Super Bowls, certainly not the first three. The NFL covered up big time for them by destroying the evidence. Let me know if you've ever heard of a sports organization that won three championships, then didn't win for over a decade(admittedly they got close a few times) and then started another run with essentially the same star, coach and system. It's unheard of and given the cheating past and the NFL and national media's desire to overlook any misgivings, it's hard to believe what you see.

Edited by Hyperion
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, japan said:

Like I’ve been saying the whole time, it was organizational and agreed upon before the start of the season. Always seemed obvious. Don’t take the Mularkey firing so hard. He had to go. 

 

Actually you flipped all over the damn place "The whole time". You laughed at people for saying AAS might have forced it, then jumped on the Amy did it then started parroting PK that VRabel decides who starts......

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hyperion said:

 

I never said Cassell would have had the same success but the strength of the Belichick system is shown by the fact that he could win 11 games with Cassell when Cassell never played meaningful college football and was basically trash anywhere else he played in the NFL.  Obviously Belichick has designed his system to basically be a dystopia where everyone is replaceable. Why would the quarterback, the most important position on the team be any different in such a system?

 

 I do believe the top 15 or so QBs all would have won multiple Super Bowls in New England over the same time frame. I do believe there is a significant difference between Drew Brees and Matt Cassell. So off the top of my head let me name the quarterbacks who all would have done comparably as good over a period of time as Brady with the same opportunity and built in  advantages: Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Eli Manning, Tony Romo, Russell Wilson, hell maybe even Joe Flacco.

 

Manning, Rodgers, and Brees are the only ones you mentioned who could have had even a small shot at doing what you said. Manning and Rodgers would had to have whittled down some of their ego, which is hard for me to see them doing, especially Manning. He and Belichick's relationship would have been a tough thing to nurture and grow.

 

The rest of those QBs? Give me a break. 

Edited by NashvilleNinja
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, japan said:

It happens all of the time. Running a lame Eddie George when Chris Brown was the obvious choice.  Playing Eli over whomever is the backup.  Not starting Bulluck his first season?  All of this stuff is obvious with 20/20 hindsight. 

 

Hell, what was your hero thinking starting a lame Murray over Henry for most of 2017 now that we see what Henry can do? Hell, maybe that's why Mularkey was fired!

 

Fisher was bashed for not playing Brown over Eddie, especially by me. 

 

Bulluck played in the nickel(majority of snaps) and Eddie Robinson was ahead of him and still playing well. People didn't know what they were talking about, that wasn't a mistake.

 

Henry was terrible in 2017 when he played late in the season aside from the KC game. Terrible run defense. Look at his game logs. He even got all the carries in the last 3 games or so and aside from the KC game was horrible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

Manning, Rodgers, and Brees are the only ones you mentioned who could have had even a small shot at doing what you said. Manning and Rodgers would had to have whittled down some of their ego, which is hard for me to see them doing, especially Manning. He and Belichick's relationship would have been a tough thing to nurture and grow.

 

The rest of those QBs? Give me a break. 

 

We're going to disagree which is fine but let me flip this on you. Brady with a league average coach/ front office, moderately difficult division. How many Super Bowls does he win? I'd be stunned if the answer is more than one but if you say more than two then you have consumed the Brady kool-aid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2019 at 6:35 AM, Helios said:

Don’t get me wrong, Tannehill’s a nice player but by no means is he untouchable. That position can absolutely and should be upgraded if the chance arises. Whether it’s a first round QB that the org really likes or a Tom Brady for example. Let’s see how he plays against the Texans first though before we look in to upgrading or locking him up.

 

 In terms of Brady being washed up, I’d look at the numbers and his supporting cast first before jumping to that conclusion.

Brady looked washed up against Texans to me...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's real simple, starting and playing MM was a desperation move. They were hoping something was going to happen that had no chance of happening, MM wasn't turning it around. He sucked in camp. The idea you had to worry about the fans is a joke. Fans are stupid, see this board or reddit for all the retarded shit people were saying to defense Mariota all the way up until this season. 

 

All they had to do was have a battle in camp. The coaches knew

 

And lastly the idea they wanted to see Mariota for two games with Lewan is the dumbest shit of all. You have 5 years and all this training camp and 4 games and you want to see him play with Lewan? Why? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, japan said:

You can bet we will be drafting a QB in the first 4 rounds.

 

I wouldn't bet on this at all. 

 

If they sign Tannehill to a long term deal why would you draft a QB? I'd guess they sign a vet back-up 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OILERMAN said:

 

I wouldn't bet on this at all. 

 

If they sign Tannehill to a long term deal why would you draft a QB? I'd guess they sign a vet back-up 

 

 

If there's a QB with good upside in the third or fourth round, then why not? RT has looked great but it wouldn't hurt to have some insurance for the future. The contrast between this year and past years with trash QBs as backups has proven the necessity of having a strong backup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Hyperion said:

 

 

If there's a QB with good upside in the third or fourth round, then why not? RT has looked great but it wouldn't hurt to have some insurance for the future. The contrast between this year and past years with trash QBs as backups has proven the necessity of having a strong backup.

 

That's fine, it's possible but that would be the case regardless. I'd argue they are in win now mode, will have a vet QB and need their draft picks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...