Why trade Mallett?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to jimmytantric's comment:

     

    In response to Getzo's comment:

     

    Isn't Mallett worth keeping for at least one more year?  I mean who is going to be a better back up for the Pats?  I don't think they should trade Mallett at all, unless they truly believe there is a better back up out there.  A QB like Mallet on this Pats team is a good back up.  They could transform into a ground and pound team to keep Mallett comfortable - God for bid something happens to Brady.  With Ridley, Vereen, Bolden, and Washington there are more then enough options to run 30+ times a game.  This defense is finally tranding in the right direction to compliment that type of game.    

    If Pats want picks they should just trade down, which I am assuming they already plan on doing.  

    Keep Mallett.  You just never know...

    When you read this report below and you consider he has been getting arguable the best coaching out there for the last 2 years... he is more valuable as a back up then a second or third round pick.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/541618-2011-nfl-draft-ryan-mallett-scouting-report 

    Most QB's are rushed into action and why they fail, so when his number is called we'll know exactly what Mallett is going to bring with 2 years of solid training under his belt.  

    I reiterate that Mallett is more important to the team at this moment than a trade chip.  

     




    If someone wants Mallet for a second -say Cleveland or KC or Minny-I would jump on it -TB has already said he wants to play until he's a grandfather,(the guy just can't get enough football), so why have this guy hold a clipboard and in a year or two you'll lose him anyway. And if TB goes down the chance Mallet takes us to the Big One and wins is probably slim. So ya get something like an early 2nd for a guy that was a third round pick-let's win while we have Brady because once he's gone can easily see the Pats dropping sharply.

     

     



    why is he getting arguably the best coaching available? Remind me again other than Brady all of the QB's BB has developed in his coaching career? Or does sitting next to Brady and listening to BB mean he is getting great coaching?

     



    Hmm, there was this one guy who was undrafted that led this team to an 11-5 record when Brady went down.  Can't remember his name though.  I'm sure BB and Brady had nothing to do with that player's progression, though.

    Serious question: Do you really think Mallet is just "sitting next to Brady" all year?  Yeah, I'm sure Tom refuses to offer ANY insight to a fellow teammate.  My God.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to jimmytantric's comment:

     

    In response to Getzo's comment:

     

    Isn't Mallett worth keeping for at least one more year?  I mean who is going to be a better back up for the Pats?  I don't think they should trade Mallett at all, unless they truly believe there is a better back up out there.  A QB like Mallet on this Pats team is a good back up.  They could transform into a ground and pound team to keep Mallett comfortable - God for bid something happens to Brady.  With Ridley, Vereen, Bolden, and Washington there are more then enough options to run 30+ times a game.  This defense is finally tranding in the right direction to compliment that type of game.    

    If Pats want picks they should just trade down, which I am assuming they already plan on doing.  

    Keep Mallett.  You just never know...

    When you read this report below and you consider he has been getting arguable the best coaching out there for the last 2 years... he is more valuable as a back up then a second or third round pick.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/541618-2011-nfl-draft-ryan-mallett-scouting-report 

    Most QB's are rushed into action and why they fail, so when his number is called we'll know exactly what Mallett is going to bring with 2 years of solid training under his belt.  

    I reiterate that Mallett is more important to the team at this moment than a trade chip.  

     




    If someone wants Mallet for a second -say Cleveland or KC or Minny-I would jump on it -TB has already said he wants to play until he's a grandfather,(the guy just can't get enough football), so why have this guy hold a clipboard and in a year or two you'll lose him anyway. And if TB goes down the chance Mallet takes us to the Big One and wins is probably slim. So ya get something like an early 2nd for a guy that was a third round pick-let's win while we have Brady because once he's gone can easily see the Pats dropping sharply.

     

     



    why is he getting arguably the best coaching available? Remind me again other than Brady all of the QB's BB has developed in his coaching career? Or does sitting next to Brady and listening to BB mean he is getting great coaching?

     

     


    oh, the ignorance in this post....

     



    Seriously.  I couldn't tell if he was being sarcastic or not, but then I remembered who posted it.

    Well gee, rkarp, that Tom Brady guy happens to be one of the best quarterbacks to ever play the game and has started every game since he got the job, with the exception of when he had a season-ending injury in which some UNDRAFTED guy came in and led this team to an 11-5 record.  But I'm sure BB had NOTHING to do with this certain player's development, nor Tom Brady's.  ugh.

     

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    It seems like this board is splitting into 2 camps.

    First camp says we live and die for the Pats and we visit this board daily for updates and to state our passion. We think BB is the best coach in the history of the NFL. It's been 10 years since a SB win, and we want more than winning AFC east divisions, and have some concerns that when Brady retires, things will be a lot more difficult. We find some of BB's free agency decisions frustrating, and this is a good forum to vent those frustrations.

    Second camp seems to say BB simply can do no wrong. How dare anyone come to this board and post a comment that disagrees with anything BB or the Pats do. And if anyone does come to this board and disagree, they will be shouted down, called names and told they are not true fans.

    I am a 30 year season ticket holder (in the family for 30 years while I have footed the bill for 15 of those years) who has also attended 4 Super Bowls. I have put my money where my mouth is, and feel my passionate criticism is warranted. I don't have to tell anyone who attends games about the cost of attending in Foxboro. I read where Krafts worth was over $2 billion, of which the Pats most likely account for 85-95% of that. Still, I applaud the well thought out money management decisions, and admire the ability of cold hearted ness which other teams have such a hard time with (hello Cowboys).

    Dont mistake passion for trolling and negativity.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    Rkarp - well stated. I get a little annoyed at the way most threads devolve into flame throwing between a few posters (and you are not immune from that annoyance) but appreciate the prespective you just stated.

    On the original question - the issue here is that as long as Brady does not suffer a career ending injury or suddenly crash in physical ability, Mallet will walk after 2014 with no compensation. And if we can get some value for him in the next 24 months it would help the team more than what he presently does for the team. That is especially true this year with the Pats being so short on draft picks. I do think Kafka was added this off season for two reasons: 1) he has shown some decent ability so could be used as a back up QB if Mallett were traded, and 2) you need extra arms in camps  just to get through them physically - most teams have at least 4 QBs in their training camps though they only carry 1 or 2 back-ups through the season with maybe another stashed on the practice squad.

    On why a team would trade for Mallett - well Oakland is in the process of unloading Palmer and trading for Flynn who they will end up paying about $13M over the next 2 years, and it appears that Arizona is about to make a trade for Palmer (after a restructure) and end up paying him about $15M for the next two years. Meanwhile the Bills on this coast just signed Kolb to a two year deal worth up to $13M. So these three teams desperate for a long term solution at QB have just committed to a mediocre aging QB and two retreads that so far have proven to not be long term solutions at an average of about 7M per year. The Bill are not giving up any picks for Kolb and the Cards and Raiders are reported to be giving up one or more late round picks for their 'solutions'.

    Now those moves may turn out brilliantly, but all three teams are likely to also draft a QB this year in the first two rounds because none of the moves they just made instill a lot of confidence. The alternative move they each could have made would be to trade for Mallet who would carry a price of 500K per year for the next two years, leaving them with an additional 6.5M in cap space to help build a better team around their QB. The cost for such a move would probably have been a second or third round pick this year and a similar pick next year. 

    I know Mallett does not have any track record in the NFL, but his scouting value except for unsubstanciated 'character' issues two years ago was 1st round grade, and certainly better than any of the current draft class (some of whom will likely be drafted in the first round anyway because there are a number of desperate teams besides those mentioned above.) And Mallett's lack of NFL experience beyond holding a clipboard cuts both ways - he has at least not proven to be mediocre as the three QBs listed above have, so his upside potential is much higher than any of them.

    Call me stupid, but if I was any one of those three GMs, and especially Oakland or Arizona, I would seriously have considered trading for Mallett rather than making the move they have made or are about to make. With Buffalo, I think BB would have demanded more because you do not want to trade a young QB within your division. Mallett may not be the answer, but he costs a lot less and has a lot more potential upside than the guys they are getting and probably than any of the draft picks they are about to spend on a QB.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

     

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.



    so there you have it...18 years, 2 QB's developed...

    but thats not the point. the point is that if Mallett returns a #1 or #2, the Pats have to pull the trigger. Regardless of Malletts promise or development, he will never play here unless Brady goes down. Mallett will walk in 2 years.

    My opinion, if allowed to have one here, is that I prefer a known #2 such as McCoy rather than the unkown that Mallett is. Where as Mallett has far more upside than McCoy, in a 1-3 game situation, I prefer the known commodity. (I only use McCoy as a possibility as he may come available. I see the Seahawks are going with Leinhart in a similar situation)

    My further opinion is that Mallett could have improved worth if he was given additional playing time, of which I have pointed out there were ample opportunities

    I disagree with some others here that point out that Mallett is a proven commodity because he "learned from the best" in Brady and BB.

    While Rusty tries, but fails to pile on, if his (Rusty) premise is correct, it would surely stand to reason that Mallett would have REGRESSED, only able to play in the shot gun formation, while learning from Brady.

       

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    It seems like this board is splitting into 2 camps.

    First camp says we live and die for the Pats and we visit this board daily for updates and to state our passion. We think BB is the best coach in the history of the NFL. It's been 10 years since a SB win, and we want more than winning AFC east divisions, and have some concerns that when Brady retires, things will be a lot more difficult. We find some of BB's free agency decisions frustrating, and this is a good forum to vent those frustrations.

    Second camp seems to say BB simply can do no wrong. How dare anyone come to this board and post a comment that disagrees with anything BB or the Pats do. And if anyone does come to this board and disagree, they will be shouted down, called names and told they are not true fans.

    I am a 30 year season ticket holder (in the family for 30 years while I have footed the bill for 15 of those years) who has also attended 4 Super Bowls. I have put my money where my mouth is, and feel my passionate criticism is warranted. I don't have to tell anyone who attends games about the cost of attending in Foxboro. I read where Krafts worth was over $2 billion, of which the Pats most likely account for 85-95% of that. Still, I applaud the well thought out money management decisions, and admire the ability of cold hearted ness which other teams have such a hard time with (hello Cowboys).

    Dont mistake passion for trolling and negativity.

     




    None of that matters because you praised the Jets here since 2010, even going as far as to start threads here in doing so. So, anything you have typed above means nothing because you're a corrupted source.  The whole reason why I confronted you was because you were so awkwardly overly praising the Jets every move, agreeing with Bruschi and other forced analysis, left and right.

     

    You work for ESPN, which is the outlet that led the Spygate charge, perpetuated it for 8 months and lied about it all the way through May of 2008.

    ESPN loves to make money off of bashing the Pats and propping up any NY team, in this case, the Jets, so it worked well for their agenda. Loud mouth owner and coach, arrogance sold as a brash confidence with a quality team, etc.  Perfect.

    Once BB traded Moss in 2010, Cris Carter changed his whole tune on how analyzed the Pats, bashing NE left and right with his personal agenda, and now you take all your cues from that moron.

    Ironically, the Jets are the organization that sold "Spygate" to the media originally.

    You're a disgrace, in a nutshell.  It's also bordering on creepy that you claim to have season tickets, which is up for debate, and bash this current BB regime and you were alive for the Sullivan/Kiam years.

    It makes absolutely no sense. Considering your other lies, it's hard to believe you are a season ticket holder or rartional as a fan watching this historical run, created by Kraft, and more importantly, BB.

    No one is saying rational analysis and criticism isn't allowed, but to ignore the big picture while creepily ignoring the outright disaster of something you liked right through the end of 2011 with the Jets (and even into 2012), is a joke.

    The rational, diehard fans won't mistake trolling and negativity.  You aren't fooling anyone. You have about 10 little buddies here, but that's about it, RKrap.

     

     




    I praised the Jets in 09, 10, 11. I thought they played very hard and appreciated their defense. There was a time that they were the last team I wanted the Pats to play in the playoffs.

    I did not work at ESPN in 08

    Carter knows more about football than you ever will. Why do you take what he says on TV as news? It is entertainment.

    I find it funny that I am defending my tickets with a guy who has never attended a game in the past 10 years

    I am not trying to fool anyone, and it seems you have 1 fan on these boards that accepts what you say as fact. Give him time, he will see right thru you, it is very easy

    And btw, stop trolling these boards putting down Brady on every thread. Us fans get you dont like him and blame him for every loss. You dont have to keep repeating it. Take it over to your Jets board that you love to copy and paste here

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to mia76's comment:

    Rkarp - well stated. I get a little annoyed at the way most threads devolve into flame throwing between a few posters (and you are not immune from that annoyance) but appreciate the prespective you just stated.

    On the original question - the issue here is that as long as Brady does not suffer a career ending injury or suddenly crash in physical ability, Mallet will walk after 2014 with no compensation. And if we can get some value for him in the next 24 months it would help the team more than what he presently does for the team. That is especially true this year with the Pats being so short on draft picks. I do think Kafka was added this off season for two reasons: 1) he has shown some decent ability so could be used as a back up QB if Mallett were traded, and 2) you need extra arms in camps  just to get through them physically - most teams have at least 4 QBs in their training camps though they only carry 1 or 2 back-ups through the season with maybe another stashed on the practice squad.

    On why a team would trade for Mallett - well Oakland is in the process of unloading Palmer and trading for Flynn who they will end up paying about $13M over the next 2 years, and it appears that Arizona is about to make a trade for Palmer (after a restructure) and end up paying him about $15M for the next two years. Meanwhile the Bills on this coast just signed Kolb to a two year deal worth up to $13M. So these three teams desperate for a long term solution at QB have just committed to a mediocre aging QB and two retreads that so far have proven to not be long term solutions at an average of about 7M per year. The Bill are not giving up any picks for Kolb and the Cards and Raiders are reported to be giving up one or more late round picks for their 'solutions'.

    Now those moves may turn out brilliantly, but all three teams are likely to also draft a QB this year in the first two rounds because none of the moves they just made instill a lot of confidence. The alternative move they each could have made would be to trade for Mallet who would carry a price of 500K per year for the next two years, leaving them with an additional 6.5M in cap space to help build a better team around their QB. The cost for such a move would probably have been a second or third round pick this year and a similar pick next year. 

    I know Mallett does not have any track record in the NFL, but his scouting value except for unsubstanciated 'character' issues two years ago was 1st round grade, and certainly better than any of the current draft class (some of whom will likely be drafted in the first round anyway because there are a number of desperate teams besides those mentioned above.) And Mallett's lack of NFL experience beyond holding a clipboard cuts both ways - he has at least not proven to be mediocre as the three QBs listed above have, so his upside potential is much higher than any of them.

    Call me stupid, but if I was any one of those three GMs, and especially Oakland or Arizona, I would seriously have considered trading for Mallett rather than making the move they have made or are about to make. With Buffalo, I think BB would have demanded more because you do not want to trade a young QB within your division. Mallett may not be the answer, but he costs a lot less and has a lot more potential upside than the guys they are getting and probably than any of the draft picks they are about to spend on a QB.




    I also posted last week that I thought both Oakland and Arizona were the best option landing spots for Mallett based on the down field offense they employ.

    I never thought the Jets or Buff were teams the Pats would trade with, Bledsoe not withstanding

    Perhaps Jacksonville even though they have Gabbert and Henne are an option, but I find that doubtful.

    Cleve has Weeen, McCoy and Campbell...other than the Lombardi factor, I simply dont see it. But if it comes to fruition, that is why I speculated on McCoy as the back up

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

     

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.

     



    so there you have it...18 years, 2 QB's developed...

     

    but thats not the point. the point is that if Mallett returns a #1 or #2, the Pats have to pull the trigger. Regardless of Malletts promise or development, he will never play here unless Brady goes down. Mallett will walk in 2 years.

    My opinion, if allowed to have one here, is that I prefer a known #2 such as McCoy rather than the unkown that Mallett is. Where as Mallett has far more upside than McCoy, in a 1-3 game situation, I prefer the known commodity. (I only use McCoy as a possibility as he may come available. I see the Seahawks are going with Leinhart in a similar situation)

    My further opinion is that Mallett could have improved worth if he was given additional playing time, of which I have pointed out there were ample opportunities

    I disagree with some others here that point out that Mallett is a proven commodity because he "learned from the best" in Brady and BB.

    While Rusty tries, but fails to pile on, if his (Rusty) premise is correct, it would surely stand to reason that Mallett would have REGRESSED, only able to play in the shot gun formation, while learning from Brady.

       



    I think we agree on some parts.  I'm in full agreement that if BB can net a 2nd or a 1st(pipe dream) then you have to pull the trigger.  We are in a "win now" phase.

    What I was disagreeing with were the unfair metrics that you apply to BB.  Why would he have to "develop" a QB if he has had one of the greatest QBs of all time starting for his team for the past 12 years?  In the tragic event that he goes down(2008), he has proved that he has indeed developed a QB.  Same can be said when Bledsoe went down.  NOBODY thought Brady could come in here and did what he did.  I think some of that credit needs to be directed at BB.

    However, you can't tell me that a player who was looked at as a high-risk(attitude) high-reward player in the draft who had all the essentials/intangibles to be a solid starting QB, that has now had 2 years working under Brady and BB, doesn't have tremendous upside.  Come on, dude.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

     

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.

     



    so there you have it...18 years, 2 QB's developed...

     

    but thats not the point. the point is that if Mallett returns a #1 or #2, the Pats have to pull the trigger. Regardless of Malletts promise or development, he will never play here unless Brady goes down. Mallett will walk in 2 years.

    My opinion, if allowed to have one here, is that I prefer a known #2 such as McCoy rather than the unkown that Mallett is. Where as Mallett has far more upside than McCoy, in a 1-3 game situation, I prefer the known commodity. (I only use McCoy as a possibility as he may come available. I see the Seahawks are going with Leinhart in a similar situation)

    My further opinion is that Mallett could have improved worth if he was given additional playing time, of which I have pointed out there were ample opportunities

    I disagree with some others here that point out that Mallett is a proven commodity because he "learned from the best" in Brady and BB.

    While Rusty tries, but fails to pile on, if his (Rusty) premise is correct, it would surely stand to reason that Mallett would have REGRESSED, only able to play in the shot gun formation, while learning from Brady.

       

     



    "18 years"?  Also, Mallett is under center more so than in the shotgun, which is ironically what Brady should be doing.

     

    You wonder why people (at least intelligent ones) challenge your moronic and irrational commentary?

     



    yes 18 years. he did not develop anyone in Cleveland either.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

     

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.

     




    RKrap and his ilk refuse, absolutely refuse, to give BB credit for anything.

     



    Apparently.  I do believe he's a good Pats fan, but it just seems he's one of those fans that doesn't like BB because of the way he comes off, so he holds him to a different standard.  I know that one of my uncles (die hard pats fan) can't stand BB because of his 'arrogance.'  It's beyond my comprehension, but people are entitled to their opinion.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:

     

    i have no problem with them trading mallett if they feel it will help the team going forward, but to say BB didnt help brady become what he is today, is just ignorant. he also helped cassell take the team to an 11-5 record in brady's absence....as irishmob just said.

     



    I can't imagine why anyone would claim that BB didn't have an enormous impact on Brady's development.  That is about as perfect an example of the NFL version of a symbiotic relationship as you can get:  BB helped make Brady what he is today and Brady has won a lot of games for BB.  

     

     

     



    Don't tell that to rkarp.  Apparently, Brady isn't a good enough example of how BB can develop QBs.  I really don't understand that premise.  I really don't.  Add Cassel's development under BB and that premise becomes asinine, actually.

     

    I feel like there is such a divide on this board.  You either think Brady is God and BB is a product of Brady's success, or vice versa.   They both have helped each other tremendously and may very well go down as the best coach/QB duo the game has ever seen.  No need to create a Catch 22 and say who is better/the reason for our success.

     



    since you did not understand it, perhaps if I repeat it again you will.
    Other than Brady, who has BB developed at the QB position?
    You obvioulsy feel Cassel is "developed"...but he has had a tough go of it. I agree he had a good season for the PAts...but again, do you feel Cassel is developed? That is fine if you do, but that is 2 QB's in his 18 years as a head coach

     

     



    I understand it perfectly, actually.  You asked, "other than Brady, who has BB developed."  I stated firstly that it's an unfair question to say "other than Brady" considering Brady is one of the best of all time and has started for the past 12 years, and ironically, was developed under BB.  So your premise goes out the window right away.  That's equivalent to saying "other than the telephone, what did Alexander Graham Bell invent?  He's not an innovator."

     

    Secondly, considering Cassel played great while he was actually with the Patriots, yes, I would say BB helped develop him.  He goes to KC, different coaching, different scheme, and he falls off, that somehow translates to BB not developing him?

    QB does well in NE with BB, doesn't do well with a new coach/new team = BB can't develop QBs.  Sweet logic.

     



    so there you have it...18 years, 2 QB's developed...

     

    but thats not the point. the point is that if Mallett returns a #1 or #2, the Pats have to pull the trigger. Regardless of Malletts promise or development, he will never play here unless Brady goes down. Mallett will walk in 2 years.

    My opinion, if allowed to have one here, is that I prefer a known #2 such as McCoy rather than the unkown that Mallett is. Where as Mallett has far more upside than McCoy, in a 1-3 game situation, I prefer the known commodity. (I only use McCoy as a possibility as he may come available. I see the Seahawks are going with Leinhart in a similar situation)

    My further opinion is that Mallett could have improved worth if he was given additional playing time, of which I have pointed out there were ample opportunities

    I disagree with some others here that point out that Mallett is a proven commodity because he "learned from the best" in Brady and BB.

    While Rusty tries, but fails to pile on, if his (Rusty) premise is correct, it would surely stand to reason that Mallett would have REGRESSED, only able to play in the shot gun formation, while learning from Brady.

       

     



    I think we agree on some parts.  I'm in full agreement that if BB can net a 2nd or a 1st(pipe dream) then you have to pull the trigger.  We are in a "win now" phase.

     

    What I was disagreeing with were the unfair metrics that you apply to BB.  Why would he have to "develop" a QB if he has had one of the greatest QBs of all time starting for his team for the past 12 years?  

    Because developing QB's is good business in the NFL.

    In the tragic event that he goes down(2008), he has proved that he has indeed developed a QB.  Same can be said when Bledsoe went down.  NOBODY thought Brady could come in here and did what he did.  I think some of that credit needs to be directed at BB.

    Yes it does

    However, you can't tell me that a player who was looked at as a high-risk(attitude) high-reward player in the draft who had all the essentials/intangibles to be a solid starting QB, that has now had 2 years working under Brady and BB, doesn't have tremendous upside.  Come on, dude.

     I agree, the upside is there. But is he ready to play now if he had to? Has his value been maximized given his rep coming out of college as a first rounder currently in the middle of a very affordable contract? Kudos to BB the GM for drafting Mallett. Genius.  But since the guy will never play here, he must be moved, and no one has an understanding of his value.

    Isn the proof in the thinking that a rebuilding team like te Raiders opted for  Flynn and his contract over Mallet? isnt it further proof that a team like the CArds will most likely prefer Palmer and his salary over Mallett? Thats because both teams have no clue in the world who Mallett is or can be in the NFL

     




     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    Oh no, a Testicleverdi reference!!  I drafted him as my starting QB for my fantasy team in 1999, I had high hopes of winning it all.  Testies went out with an injury for the season in the first game.  I give him the evil eye everytime I see the guy!!

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    Are head coaches responsible for developing QBs? I think they're lucky that they identify one and give him a system that helps him to excel. Did Walsh "develop" Montana and Young, did Shula develop Marino? Those QBs were fortunate to get drafted by a team with a coach and a system that allowed them to take full advantage of their talent, that's all. Just like Brady.

    They were developed by their parents and God.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from nomadfan. Show nomadfan's posts

    Re: Why trade Mallett?

    In response to TFB12's comment:

     

    Oh no, a Testicleverdi reference!!  I drafted him as my starting QB for my fantasy team in 1999, I had high hopes of winning it all.  Testies went out with an injury for the season in the first game.  I give him the evil eye everytime I see the guy!!

     




    You have to admit Vinny is more than just a baller. He is twice the man you think.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share