2017 Jimmy G: The Dilemma

Do we keep JG as the successor?

  • Yes, Lifes unsure and Brady might actually be mortal and JG is showing too much promise

    Votes: 90 34.9%
  • We keep him for the life of his contract, If it works out it works out.

    Votes: 55 21.3%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 1" asset this off season

    Votes: 72 27.9%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 2" asset this off season

    Votes: 7 2.7%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 3" asset this off season

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 1+" asset this off season

    Votes: 27 10.5%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 2+" asset this off season

    Votes: 7 2.7%
  • Instead we trade JG for a "Tier 3+" asset this off season

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    258

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,948
NH
You know part of it is that BB might just not value this draft all that highly. I know I don't. What's the point of trading for a top 12 pick if he doesn't value the 2017 draft as a strong one?
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
5,932
I think he knows the biggest thing to derail the team is losing Brady, the chance of which goes up exponentially in late 30s. So, even though it is expensive insurance, including lost opportunity cost, the insurance against a season being thrown away is worth it.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Doug Kyed‏Verified account @DougKyed 2h2 hours ago
Looking forward to retirement 40 years from now, sitting on a rocking chair hearing how the Browns are still trying to trade for Jimmy G.
Yup. It's not going away. After this weekend, everyone will be waiting for the next Teddy Bridgewater to go down.

I don't think Cabot is making stuff up. I think the smartest kids in the analytics class in Cleveland are trying to steal JG. No harm in trying, but good luck with that.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Yup. It's not going away. After this weekend, everyone will be waiting for the next Teddy Bridgewater to go down.

I don't think Cabot is making stuff up. I think the smartest kids in the analytics class in Cleveland are trying to steal JG. No harm in trying, but good luck with that.
That won't be the case at all. If Jimmy stays a Patriot, it's because they want him for the long haul.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I don't think they'll trade him, but if they do the bulk of the value will be in future picks. Unlike most, the Patriots staff has a loaded roster and no job-pressure to win right away, and teams trading away picks tend to value current over future picks more. The only reason I think there is a chance that it still could happen is the wealth of future picks the Browns own.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
I think he knows the biggest thing to derail the team is losing Brady, the chance of which goes up exponentially in late 30s. So, even though it is expensive insurance, including lost opportunity cost, the insurance against a season being thrown away is worth it.
I think this is right. I think this is a go for it now play. Last year they don't win the Super Bowl without Bennett, even though Bennett isn't Gronkowski. When you've put together this complete a roster, why risk it all on one old guy's health?

Of course they never seem to be all-in GFIN and they've never been this concerned about Brady's backup before so it's possible i am full of crap.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
I think this is right. I think this is a go for it now play. Last year they don't win the Super Bowl without Bennett, even though Bennett isn't Gronkowski. When you've put together this complete a roster, why risk it all on one old guy's health?

Of course they never seem to be all-in GFIN and they've never been this concerned about Brady's backup before so it's possible i am full of crap.
Yeah I keep going around in circles on this. On the one hand they are never in GFIN mode, but they've never handled something this way before.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I think he knows the biggest thing to derail the team is losing Brady, the chance of which goes up exponentially in late 30s. So, even though it is expensive insurance, including lost opportunity cost, the insurance against a season being thrown away is worth it.
Brady was coming off an ACL tear in 2009 and Bill went into the season with UDFA Brian Hoyer as the only other QB on the roster. I don't believe this is Belichick overvaluing insurance in case of a Brady injury, he must really love Garoppolo.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
6,844
Chicago, IL
A potential issue with trading JG for future picks is that by the time those future picks become current picks, they may not be enough to land us a quality QB if we happen to need one.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
Some of us have certainly questioned whether it was worth one year of a backup to turn down future value. I don't see how that's an unreasonable question, when the only answer one can come back with is "what if Brady gets hurt, he's 40 years old ya know?'.
The problem with that question is the presumption of "one year of a backup".

The vast majority of the noise up to this point has been that the Patriots are very high on JG, and that he was never available, and that "one year of a backup" isn't the value in question here.

I mean christ, is it really hard to believe that a team with a 40 year old quarterback and an otherwise absolutely stacked roster wants to hold onto a good QB prospect?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
The problem with that question is the presumption of "one year of a backup".

The vast majority of the noise up to this point has been that the Patriots are very high on JG, and that he was never available, and that "one year of a backup" isn't the value in question here.

I mean christ, is it really hard to believe that a team with a 40 year old quarterback and an otherwise absolutely stacked roster wants to hold onto a good QB prospect?
It's not that hard to believe, but I'd love to see what the plan is, considering Jimmy and Brady's contract situations. The way this has unfolded tells me that there's a 95% chance Garoppolo is a Patriot in 2018. The question is whether he stays under the franchise tag, signs a new deal with the knowledge he'll sit for a couple more years, or signs for starter money after Bill gets rid of Brady. If they end up letting Jimmy walk after refusing a boatload of picks, just because of the insurance he provides for the 2017 season, it'll be monumentally stupid. At this point, I'm fully convinced Belichick believes Garoppolo figures into the Patriots long term plans.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The problem with that question is the presumption of "one year of a backup".

The vast majority of the noise up to this point has been that the Patriots are very high on JG, and that he was never available, and that "one year of a backup" isn't the value in question here.

I mean christ, is it really hard to believe that a team with a 40 year old quarterback and an otherwise absolutely stacked roster wants to hold onto a good QB prospect?
I know. It's nuts. GFIN is the tail on the dog. The dog is a ten year insurance policy that you KNOW you're going to cash, probably within a couple of years.

Right under our noses we have exhibit A of the otherwise decent team that cannot get QB right for a period of many years. It's the NY Jets.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,369
It's not that hard to believe, but I'd love to see what the plan is, considering Jimmy and Brady's contract situations. The way this has unfolded tells me that there's a 95% chance Garoppolo is a Patriot in 2018. The question is whether he stays under the franchise tag, signs a new deal with the knowledge he'll sit for a couple more years, or signs for starter money after Bill gets rid of Brady. If they end up letting Jimmy walk after refusing a boatload of picks, just because of the insurance he provides for the 2017 season, it'll be monumentally stupid. At this point, I'm fully convinced Belichick believes Garoppolo figures into the Patriots long term plans.
What if that insurance is needed for like 8 games of 2017 and is a key factor in the Pats winning another super bowl?
 

H78

Fists of Millennial Fury!
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2009
4,613
If we're this worried about Tom Brady being made of glass in 2017, maybe we should consider trading him to the Browns.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
The problem with that question is the presumption of "one year of a backup".

The vast majority of the noise up to this point has been that the Patriots are very high on JG, and that he was never available, and that "one year of a backup" isn't the value in question here.

I mean christ, is it really hard to believe that a team with a 40 year old quarterback and an otherwise absolutely stacked roster wants to hold onto a good QB prospect?
No, but the most likely outcome now is Jimmy G leaving for a comp pick or something a little better via franchise and trade after this season. At least that's what I'm rooting for because otherwise the Pats probably didn't win another Super Bowl. Fine to have the insurance for the low probability case that Brady goes over the cliff this year.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,054
Honest question: if the Patriots win the super bowl this year and JG sits on the bench all year and then walks next year are people going to be angry?


In the end I wouldn't be given we'd be coming off 3 SB in 4 years with a heathy Brady in tact, but that said my vote is to trade him as I think they still win the Super Bowl with Brissett given how deeep the team is across the board.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,014
Oregon
I still believe they won't trade him, but I've come around to the opinion that they should ... if the Browns offer what would appear to be an overpay.

I don't think Brady is indestructible, but I am content with the success to this stage -- and anything that can give the Patriots an edge in drafts down the road (assuming they trade down and out in 2018 to 19, and so on) is something that I would be more invested in as a fan
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Honest question: if the Patriots win the super bowl this year and JG sits on the bench all year and then walks next year are people going to be angry?


In the end I wouldn't be given we'd be coming off 3 SB in 4 years with a heathy Brady in tact, but that said my vote is to trade him as I think they still win the Super Bowl with Brissett given how deeep the team is across the board.
No team has won a Super Bowl with a quarterback as bad as or worse than Brissett since 2015.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
If we're this worried about Tom Brady being made of glass in 2017, maybe we should consider trading him to the Browns.
Our worries, as always, are irrelevant. It's the team's estimation that matters.

FWIW, I do not believe that TB will be traded unless he wants to be. I do believe that when the day comes that BB is persuaded that the guy behind him is materially better, that guy will start at QB. If TB plays long enough, that day will come. It may not come in season -- in season substitution may not be a great idea for everyone. But it's coming unless Tom decides to hang them up a day too early rather than a day too late.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
The problem with that question is the presumption of "one year of a backup".

The vast majority of the noise up to this point has been that the Patriots are very high on JG, and that he was never available, and that "one year of a backup" isn't the value in question here.

I mean christ, is it really hard to believe that a team with a 40 year old quarterback and an otherwise absolutely stacked roster wants to hold onto a good QB prospect?
It's not hard to believe that, of course they want to keep him. The problem with the stance you (and many others) are taking is that I've seen no one provide a viable scenario where keeping JG long term as successor to TB.

They're not going to repeatedly franchise him and end up paying him $80M to sit the bench for three years. And it seems foolish to me to think he'd sign a long term deal at terms that would make sense, when he can go out and get at least Osweiller money, based on what, wanting to be part of 'The Patriot Way[emoji769]'?

TB is playing two more seasons at the minimum. There was talk of them discussing an extension around the SB. I'm all ears for someone to present a reasonable, viable and realistic option for keeping him here beyond this season or the next, without the fallback of 'TB is going into his age 40 season and could get hurt'.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Honest question: if the Patriots win the super bowl this year and JG sits on the bench all year and then walks next year are people going to be angry?
I think on the whole people here will understand that outcome even if the Pats don't win the Super Bowl. Pushing Brady out the door probably a harder sell to the general Patriots fan community than not pushing Brady out the door and moving to Jimmy G
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
Honest question: if the Patriots win the super bowl this year and JG sits on the bench all year and then walks next year are people going to be angry?


In the end I wouldn't be given we'd be coming off 3 SB in 4 years with a heathy Brady in tact, but that said my vote is to trade him as I think they still win the Super Bowl with Brissett given how deeep the team is across the board.
No. That's the plan in my mind
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
No, but the most likely outcome now is Jimmy G leaving for a comp pick or something a little better via franchise and trade after this season. At least that's what I'm rooting for because otherwise the Pats probably didn't win another Super Bowl. Fine to have the insurance for the low probability case that Brady goes over the cliff this year.
Why do you think this is the most likely case?
TB is playing two more seasons at the minimum. There was talk of them discussing an extension around the SB. I'm all ears for someone to present a reasonable, viable and realistic option for keeping him here beyond this season or the next, without the fallback of 'TB is going into his age 40 season and could get hurt'.
Your continued assertion that Tom Brady is going to play at a minimum 2+ years is a baseless opinion at this point. There is simply no reason to believe that 2 years is any sort of minimum.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Because I continue to think the idea that the Pats are moving on from Brady while he's still playing well is a fantasy, I think the chances of Brady playing well this year is over 50 percent, and think the chances of Jimmy G staying on in '18 without a starting job are low. So I think the most likely outcome is Jimmy G somewhere else in '18.

Brady planning to play at least two years is far from a baseless opinion. Its Brady's own public statements. Of course that could get derailed given Brady's age, but unless he gets injured or is terrible this year he is playing in 2018.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Your continued assertion that Tom Brady is going to play at a minimum 2+ years is a baseless opinion at this point. There is simply no reason to believe that 2 years is any sort of minimum.
Do you mean other than the fact that he has two years left on his contract, has repeatedly stated he wants to play longer than that and there were reports around the Super Bowl that they were talking extension?

How exactly is that baseless?

What's baseless is thinking that if TB got hit by a bus tomorrow that JG would step in and carry the torch, lead us to sustained excellence and another dynasty. Because it's based on 6 quarters of play. It's baseless to think they would eschew TB in order to continue on with JG as if he's some kind of guarantee. It's baseless to think they would pay him the franchise price to ride backup duty as a break glass emergency, because they've never managed the cap in such a way and we have multiple accounts from agents that say they base thief FA strategy on 'no one makes more than Tom'. It's baseless to think JG would sacrifice money and playing time as a starter with an unknown date of ascension. It's baseless to think TB has any designs on retiring when he says exactly the opposite of that and furthers that by being quoted as saying 'I've figured it all out, there's no defense I havent seen.' Or 'I feel better physically than I did when I was in my 20s'.

It is not baseless opinion to state that short of catastrophic injury, TB will be the starting QB of the NEP for the next 2 seasons. Spare me the 'a 40 yo qb can drop off a cliff at any moment' shit. TB has shown he's an outlier to pretty much every anecdote in the book. Until he starts to show decline it's not in the discussion and considering he just came off one of the best seasons of his career, that conversation is nowhere near the table.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Well the idea that Brady can't fall off a cliff is too strong and the statement about JG leading the team to another dynasty is a strawman....but he did pretty convincingly refute your contention that Brady playing 2+ years is a baseless opinion. Id add to PP's post that Brady flat out stated on his podcast with Peter King "2017 will not be my last year".

Now both PP and I think the Pats will never get rid of an effective Brady after the '17 season, you think there is a very good chance they will push him out the door. Those are opinions (although Id argue they arent baseless), and we can agree to disagree. But saying that "Brady is going to play a minimum 2 more years is a baseless opinion" is just not true. Injuries happen, its football, and old players lose effectiveness, but the evidence is very strongly in favor of Brady planning to play a minimum of two more seasons and there's a fair bit of evidence that the Patriots plan A at quarterback is for Brady to be the starter for the next two seasons at minimum.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Well one of the following is true:

1. BB highly values JG as a one-season back-up/insurance for TB12 and he then plans to let JG walk (or franchise/trade him) in 2018.
2. BB plans to somehow manage the cap and keep JG and TB12 past 2017 because he highly values both of them.
3. BB is at least considering dropping/trading TB12 after this year (or EDIT: CALL THIS 3A-considering the possibility TB12 is injured) and values JG as a QB over other foreseeable options so much he decided to hold onto him just in case
4. BB does not value JG all that highly, but he also doesn't value high draft picks in this or next year's draft.
5. BB totally bungled the whole situation.

What did I miss?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
Well one of the following is true:

1. BB highly values JG as a one-season back-up/insurance for TB12 and he then plans to let JG walk (or franchise/trade him) in 2018.
2. BB plans to somehow manage the cap and keep JG and TB12 past 2017 because he highly values both of them.
3. BB is at least considering dropping/trading TB12 after this year (or considering the possibility TB12 is injured) and values JG as a QB over other foreseeable options so much he decided to hold onto him just in case
4. BB does not value JG all that highly, but he also doesn't value high draft picks in this or next year's draft.
5. BB totally bungled the whole situation.

What did I miss?
I think you missed a scenario that no other team thought highly enough of JG to offer enough to make trading him worthwhile (and I don't think the Jamie Collins comparison can be made here either since Collins could actively hurt the team with his play and in the locker room). It's kind of a corollary of your scenario 4.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,667
Your continued assertion that Tom Brady is going to play at a minimum 2+ years is a commonsense opinion at this point. There are a couple of referenced reasons to believe that 2 years is an informed minimum.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I think you missed a scenario that no other team thought highly enough of JG to offer enough to make trading him worthwhile (and I don't think the Jamie Collins comparison can be made here either since Collins could actively hurt the team with his play and in the locker room). It's kind of a corollary of your scenario 4.
Correct in the sense that the other variable is that we dont actually know what the Browns offered.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I see no basis at this point for disputing the reporting that began with Werder, was endorsed emphatically and regularly by Schefter and confirmed by guys with a more local perspective, IIRC, Curran and or Reiss: JG either was not available, period, or the Pats would "think about it" if two 1st round picks were put on the table.

That message was clear and consistent, sent publicly and maybe privately too. Teams, and the Pats certainly, are not into wasting time and effort.

So "highly enough" in this context means the Pats' required minimum, and there should be no surprise that no team may have been willing to meet that.

The point has been made, but probably bears repeating -- JG is worth more to the Pats than potential trade partners, and the gap could not be bridged.
 

Hagios

New Member
Dec 15, 2007
672
I think part of the trickiness is disaggregating the different scenarios for Brady and Garoppolo.

Garoppolo
G1 Internal scouting and six quarters of play says that Garoppolo is the QB of the future
G2 Garoppolo is not the QB of the future ... but has trade value if other teams think he might be.

I think G1 must be true or there would have been a trade before the draft.

Brady
B1 Brady sits down with Bill and says I'm 99% sure I'm retiring after next season, but I don't want to seem like Brett Favre so let's keep this in house in case I change my mind.
B2 Brady says he is going to play as long as he is healthy and effective, and believes that could be for another five or more years. Belichick disagrees and thinks two years is more accurate
B3 Brady and Belichick both expect Brady to be healthy and effective for more than a couple years.

I think B2 is the most likely scenario. In which case, extending the QB of the future would be ideal, but franchising him for one year would still be wise. If you're JG, even if you're mad at being a backup QB for an extra two years, there's no way you turn down the keys to the Patriots franchise to sign somewhere else.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I think part of the trickiness is disaggregating the different scenarios for Brady and Garoppolo.

Garoppolo
G1 Internal scouting and six quarters of play says that Garoppolo is the QB of the future
G2 Garoppolo is not the QB of the future ... but has trade value if other teams think he might be.

I think G1 must be true or there would have been a trade before the draft.

Brady
B1 Brady sits down with Bill and says I'm 99% sure I'm retiring after next season, but I don't want to seem like Brett Favre so let's keep this in house in case I change my mind.
B2 Brady says he is going to play as long as he is healthy and effective, and believes that could be for another five or more years. Belichick disagrees and thinks two years is more accurate
B3 Brady and Belichick both expect Brady to be healthy and effective for more than a couple years.

I think B2 is the most likely scenario. In which case, extending the QB of the future would be ideal, but franchising him for one year would still be wise. If you're JG, even if you're mad at being a backup QB for an extra two years, there's no way you turn down the keys to the Patriots franchise to sign somewhere else.
I dont know about the bolded. At the very least if the Pats pay him $22MM under the franchise tag, basically anoint him the successor to Brady, and would have to pay him $24-$25MM guaranteed to control his rights for 2018 (and maybe he doesnt like being the backup for another year, which wouldnt engender loyalty, but we cant say that for sure)....doesnt the price to keep him off the open market at that point start with a Kirk Cousins like 5/125 with a lot of money guaranteed? Why do we think he'd take less money to play here at that point? Wouldnt the franchise be better off locking up Jimmy G long-term now and moving on from Brady after 2017 if they are absolutely convinced he is the future of the franchise?
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
Well one of the following is true:

1. BB highly values JG as a one-season back-up/insurance for TB12 and he then plans to let JG walk (or franchise/trade him) in 2018.
2. BB plans to somehow manage the cap and keep JG and TB12 past 2017 because he highly values both of them.
3. BB is at least considering dropping/trading TB12 after this year (or EDIT: CALL THIS 3A-considering the possibility TB12 is injured) and values JG as a QB over other foreseeable options so much he decided to hold onto him just in case
4. BB does not value JG all that highly, but he also doesn't value high draft picks in this or next year's draft.
5. BB totally bungled the whole situation.

What did I miss?
BB thinks JG's trade value will increase if he waits until training camp/preseason.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
BB thinks JG's trade value will increase if he waits until training camp/preseason.
It's not just trade value, they get to look at Brady and Brissett next summer to see how well the GOAT's holding up and how far the latter has come before having to make a decision.

This year's roster didn't have very much room, so they were always going to value future picks over present ones. So if Brady shows no signs of slowing down and Brissett looks like a real future option, there will always be a team desperate enough for a QB to cough up for JG next fall.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,518
Maine
SO they want to keep JG for insurance to see how Brady looks going into his age 40 season.
But will be fine with Brissett as the backup going into his age 41 season?

Somehow his age 40 pre-season will give more comfort (then we have now) that father time is still a couple years away???

I dont buy it. If your worried about Brady going into his age 40 season, so worried that you forego trading JG when he is most valuable (with 1 cheap year left), then your not gonna be "unworried" with him going into his age 41 season.

BB is obviously worried. History is on his side in that few players continue above average performance into their 40s. (while I disagree and think that Brady might just be able to be a top 10 QB into his mid 40s......BB seemingly disagrees).

Lets say that BB sees Brady is "good to go" this pre-season and he tries to trade JG at point.
1. He (for some reason) questioned Bradys ability to come back at age 40. But is heartened by an incredibly SSS by a QB who could fall off the cliff very quickly.
or
2. He believes that JG would return more in Pre-season then the Draft.

I dont believe that a few weeks of practice will allay #1 much beyond the 2017 season. I also dont believe in #2.

Lets say that BB decided he wanted "one more year" of insurance and he plans to trade JG in 2018 (either at the Draft or in pre-season)..
1. He feels that despite giving up the 1 cheap JG year that he can still get significant value in trade even as a QB on the franchise tag.
2. He thinks that JG will be (significantly) better then Brissett this year (2017) but MAYBE not next year (2018). IE Brissett will be comparable.
3. He believes that Brady will be a quality starter Next year at age 41 and or that Brissett will provide that same level of "insurance" that JG is providing this year. IE the ability to come in as the starter moving forward.
4. You also have to believe that BB is comfortable in an age 41 Brady or Brissett moving forward (2019,2020) rather then JG.


For my part I have become convinced that Brady is at most here through 2018, but no longer, and perhaps only for 2017. JG is the heir and will be the NE QB not later then 2019.
Maybe Bradys family situation is a factor (his mom, Giselle and the kids). Maybe he feels he has climbed the mountain and wants a new challange. Who knows. But I think behind the scenes he is singing a different tune then "playing till 45!"

My only conundrum is what purpose does the "Playing till I am 45" disinformation serve?
1. Avoid the media circus of a "Retirement tour"?
2. Some kind of personnel advantage to the Patriots? IE still able to sign ring chasing vets.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
Here's my take.

Bill has seen enough of JG that he views him as a starter capable of winning him a championship. If you want a QB of that caliber, you're going to give up more than say the #12 pick and a 2nd or 3rd. And who knows if that kind of offer was even on the table.

Bill also knows he has a 40yr old QB that can't play forever. He also thinks the gap between JG and JB is significant enough that he can't win a title next year if Brady goes down.

He may also be trying to figure out a way to make the numbers work even if he has to franchise Jimmy next year. But if he can't, he can franchise and trade him or let him walk and pick up a compensatory pick in the 3rd round, I believe. Maybe Bill saw that #12 pick as something just not valuable enough to trade a guy he feels he can win with.

I haven't had any insider info in a long time, but one of the last things I heard was that BB absolutely loved Jimmy and wasn't going to trade him. And that was after they drafted Brissett in the 3rd round and before the Pats went out and won a Super Bowl. While I wanted a boatload of picks for him like most here did, I'm not surprised at all that he's still on the roster today.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
You'd think some reporter would have something on the plan. I never even heard Schefter, who was adamant about the no trade early and often, explain Belichick's thinking. It's pretty remarkable how little has gotten out given how big a story this has been.
Edit: didn't see ElCabs post when I posted mine. His makes sense.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
SO they want to keep JG for insurance to see how Brady looks going into his age 40 season.
But will be fine with Brissett as the backup going into his age 41 season?

Somehow his age 40 pre-season will give more comfort (then we have now) that father time is still a couple years away???

I dont buy it. If your worried about Brady going into his age 40 season, so worried that you forego trading JG when he is most valuable (with 1 cheap year left), then your not gonna be "unworried" with him going into his age 41 season.

BB is obviously worried. History is on his side in that few players continue above average performance into their 40s. (while I disagree and think that Brady might just be able to be a top 10 QB into his mid 40s......BB seemingly disagrees).

Lets say that BB sees Brady is "good to go" this pre-season and he tries to trade JG at point.
1. He (for some reason) questioned Bradys ability to come back at age 40. But is heartened by an incredibly SSS by a QB who could fall off the cliff very quickly.
or
2. He believes that JG would return more in Pre-season then the Draft.

I dont believe that a few weeks of practice will allay #1 much beyond the 2017 season. I also dont believe in #2.

Lets say that BB decided he wanted "one more year" of insurance and he plans to trade JG in 2018 (either at the Draft or in pre-season)..
1. He feels that despite giving up the 1 cheap JG year that he can still get significant value in trade even as a QB on the franchise tag.
2. He thinks that JG will be (significantly) better then Brissett this year (2017) but MAYBE not next year (2018). IE Brissett will be comparable.
3. He believes that Brady will be a quality starter Next year at age 41 and or that Brissett will provide that same level of "insurance" that JG is providing this year. IE the ability to come in as the starter moving forward.
4. You also have to believe that BB is comfortable in an age 41 Brady or Brissett moving forward (2019,2020) rather then JG.


For my part I have become convinced that Brady is at most here through 2018, but no longer, and perhaps only for 2017. JG is the heir and will be the NE QB not later then 2019.
Maybe Bradys family situation is a factor (his mom, Giselle and the kids). Maybe he feels he has climbed the mountain and wants a new challange. Who knows. But I think behind the scenes he is singing a different tune then "playing till 45!"

My only conundrum is what purpose does the "Playing till I am 45" disinformation serve?
1. Avoid the media circus of a "Retirement tour"?
2. Some kind of personnel advantage to the Patriots? IE still able to sign ring chasing vets.
Jimmy G costs very little this year in salary. He'd cost $20MM plus to franchise/transition tag next year. So they arent really very similar decisions.

We have zero evidence Brady doesnt want to play for a long time. Im pretty skeptical he's going to be a starting QB at 45, but we have literally zero reason to believe that's not his intention right now.

ElCab pretty much nails it as did KFP. They'll keep a player they really like for a year and go from there. I think its going to end up with Jimmy walking or getting traded, but Brady is 40, who knows?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
Jimmy G costs very little this year in salary. He'd cost $20MM plus to franchise/transition tag next year. So they arent really very similar decisions.

We have zero evidence Brady doesnt want to play for a long time. Im pretty skeptical he's going to be a starting QB at 45, but we have literally zero reason to believe that's not his intention right now.

ElCab pretty much nails it as did KFP. They'll keep a player they really like for a year and go from there. I think its going to end up with Jimmy walking or getting traded, but Brady is 40, who knows?
I believe this nails it.

Belichick doesn't have to make a decision on JG this offseason. He also knows that at some point a decision will need to made at QB, and that decision could come as early as next offseason. NFL actuarial tables tell us that the chances of needing to make that decision next year are not insignificant. And even though Brady is saying today that he wants to play until 45, even he could end up changing his mind by the time February rolls around. Few predicted Tony Romo's move to the broadcast booth.

It may seem strange to many of us that the #12 pick in the draft was not enough to sway Belichick's decision, but obviously yet another example of Belichick valuing things differently than the rest of us (and that's assuming the #12 pick was actually in play).
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Here's my guess:
  • BB knows that he will never have another GOAT.
  • BB feels strongly about being able to win with a top-15 to top-20 QB if all other pieces are good enough. He bases that on league history. In the last 35 years, about 2/3 of the SBs have been won by QBs who would be considered top 5 in the NFL in that year -- Montana, Young, Aikman, Elway, Favre, Warner, Brady, Peyton, Brees. But a lot have been won by mediocre to above average QBs (guys I would say that most people would have put in the 5-20 ranks in that year): Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer, Johnson, Eli, Big Ben, Flacco, Wilson.
  • Right now, BB thinks that in Jimmy G he has a 5-20 level QB as insurance against a Brady injury (my guess is that BB doesn't think that 2017 would see the proverbial cliff for Brady to fall off)
  • BB thinks that by September of 2018, after 2 more preseasons where he will see a lot of reps, that in JB he MIGHT have a 5-20 level QB, again as hedge against injury or the increasing likelihood of aforementioned cliff).
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I believe this nails it.

Belichick doesn't have to make a decision on JG this offseason. He also knows that at some point a decision will need to made at QB, and that decision could come as early as next offseason. NFL actuarial tables tell us that the chances of needing to make that decision next year are not insignificant. And even though Brady is saying today that he wants to play until 45, even he could end up changing his mind by the time February rolls around. Few predicted Tony Romo's move to the broadcast booth.

It may seem strange to many of us that the #12 pick in the draft was not enough to sway Belichick's decision, but obviously yet another example of Belichick valuing things differently than the rest of us (and that's assuming the #12 pick was actually in play).
Do we even have any reliable reports that the Browns ever even offered the #12 pick? That's an honest question, I've lost track in this labyrinth and I don't find it out of the picture that his contract status was enough to lead them to not go that high. It still seems like projection to me, but I could be missing something.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
Do we even have any reliable reports that the Browns ever even offered the #12 pick? That's an honest question, I've lost track in this labyrinth and I don't find it out of the picture that his contract status was enough to lead them to not go that high. It still seems like projection to me, but I could be missing something.
I don't know that we ever had good confirmation that 12 was offered, just every analyst saying that it made sense. The fact that they called after round 1 to see if they could get him makes me wonder if it ever was. I know they had a ton of picks later in the draft and next year, but I just don't think they offered anything that interested the Pats.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Do we even have any reliable reports that the Browns ever even offered the #12 pick? That's an honest question, I've lost track in this labyrinth and I don't find it out of the picture that his contract status was enough to lead them to not go that high. It still seems like projection to me, but I could be missing something.
There were reports (Schefter?) that the Pats wanted two 1st round picks. From that, there was speculation that the Browns might offer a 2017 1st (#12) and a 2018 1st.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
There were reports (Schefter?) that the Pats wanted two 1st round picks. From that, there was speculation that the Browns might offer a 2017 1st (#12) and a 2018 1st.
Talk of two first round picks -- that started 2 months ago, at least, popping up on NFLN March 7.

 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Correct. Think it makes sense the Browns offered 12, but dont really think we have solid confirmation it happened. Seems reasonably possible it never got to the point of making an offer if the Pats feedback was "he's not really on the block, but we value him as we would value a top drafted quarterback"