Jump to content
Elky

Jarrett Stidham

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Starless said:

I mean the stuff about BB thinking Stidham is somehow a better player (or at least was a better prospect) than all but the handful of highest-graded QBs of the last two drafts. Every time I hear something like that, I roll my eyes because if it were true they would've drafted him way higher than the 133rd overall pick last year.

They picked three guys who played 2 games between them with the picks directly ahead of Stidham last year. That doesn't scream "we think this guy is a top-tier prospect".

Tom Brady, Joe Montana and Dan Marino for that matter had QB's picked before them. So your point is highest rated mean nothing.

Find me one fan that wouldn't put Stidman over Dwayne Haskins and Mitch Trubisky who are complete bust. Where a QB is drafted means very little, say Brady Quinn!!!!

Stidman out performed most of the QB in his class. They draft a guy based on many factors. Skills they think they can develop , so far they doing a great job with STARING QB FOR THE NE PATRIOTS.

Edited by m haynes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already take issue with that guy saying Brady got better as the years went on. Obviously he developed as a pro, everyone does, but the only material difference between 2007 and 2006 was who he was throwing to. Likewise, the "early Pats SBs were based on defense and running the ball" is a myth developing well after the fact.

Obviously the defenses were always good, but the only year they had a dominant run game was 04. (Actually, a cursory check says that of Brady's 20 years in NE, the only season the run game was better than the pass were '04, '06 and '13). In 2003, the Patriots had a bottom 10 run game across the board, but a much better than average passing attack, Brady threw for 350 yards in the SB. The idea he was just a solid pro along for the ride is ridiculous. 

Brady lead the league in TDs his first full season as a starter. Before his historic 2007 season his career passer rating was 88. Very average 13 years later, but at the time it was a top 10 passer rating of all time.

Maybe Stidham is better than we realise, possibly, but the argument Brady wasn't always Brady is historically illiterate.

Personally, I don't think BB sees Stidham as the answer, so much as he's cheap unknown quantity vs. expensive known mediocrities. If he balls out, great. If he flunks, well then draft Lawrence and move on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

21 minutes ago, ChazStandard said:

Personally, I don't think BB sees Stidham as the answer, so much as he's cheap unknown quantity vs. expensive known mediocrities. If he balls out, great. If he flunks, well then draft Lawrence and move on. 

Whole-heartedly disagree, if Belichick didn't see Stidham as the answer then I think he would have either drafted a QB this year or actually signed one in free agency since it was one to the deepest QB free agent pools in a long time. I'll take Reiss' word for it that the Pats really want to go with Stidham...

 

Edited by silence22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, silence22 said:

 

Whole-heartedly disagree, if Belichick didn't see Stidham as the answer then I think he would have either drafted a QB this year or actually signed one in free agency this year since it was one to the deepest QB free agent pools in a long time. I'll take Reiss' word for it that the Pats really want to go with Stidham...

 

He might not think he is the 'answer' while also not thinking any other available QB (FA or draft) is the 'answer' either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Deadpulse said:

He might not think he is the 'answer' while also not thinking any other available QB (FA or draft) is the 'answer' either. 

Exactly. If he considers that Dalton and Stidham bring the same thing to the table play-wise, then obviously you ride with Stidham who is cheaper, more familiar and at least somewhat of an unknown quantity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ChazStandard said:

I already take issue with that guy saying Brady got better as the years went on. Obviously he developed as a pro, everyone does, but the only material difference between 2007 and 2006 was who he was throwing to. Likewise, the "early Pats SBs were based on defense and running the ball" is a myth developing well after the fact.

Obviously the defenses were always good, but the only year they had a dominant run game was 04. (Actually, a cursory check says that of Brady's 20 years in NE, the only season the run game was better than the pass were '04, '06 and '13). In 2003, the Patriots had a bottom 10 run game across the board, but a much better than average passing attack, Brady threw for 350 yards in the SB. The idea he was just a solid pro along for the ride is ridiculous. 

Brady lead the league in TDs his first full season as a starter. Before his historic 2007 season his career passer rating was 88. Very average 13 years later, but at the time it was a top 10 passer rating of all time.

Maybe Stidham is better than we realise, possibly, but the argument Brady wasn't always Brady is historically illiterate.

Personally, I don't think BB sees Stidham as the answer, so much as he's cheap unknown quantity vs. expensive known mediocrities. If he balls out, great. If he flunks, well then draft Lawrence and move on. 

Statistically speaking Brady's first season did not make anyone think he would one day be considered the GOAT. Eight games in which he passed for under 200 yards, two of which were under 100 yards, and two other games that he barely eclipsed 200 yards (206 and 209). But you could tell that Brady was a winner. Also you don't have to be the best defense or running game for that to be you identity. There was a time when the Patriots were content to average 3.8 yards per attempt as long as they weren't making mistakes and win ugly, last year for example. 

I don't think that if Belichick didn't think Stidham could do the job that he would be the leading candidate to have it. I know that everyone says that no one knows anything about Stidham because no one has seen him, well the Patriot coaching staff saw him everyday in practice last year. Also if they didn't really think he could do the job he would not have been backing up a 42 year old QB last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ChazStandard said:

Brady lead the league in TDs his first full season as a starter. Before his historic 2007 season his career passer rating was 88. Very average 13 years later, but at the time it was a top 10 passer rating of all time.

crae crae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, ChazStandard said:

 

Personally, I don't think BB sees Stidham as the answer, so much as he's cheap unknown quantity vs. expensive known mediocrities. If he balls out, great. If he flunks, well then draft Lawrence and move on. 

I think BB see's him as the best possible answer currently; probably not THE answer to get back to 01-19 Pats. I think if he knew of a way of getting us better right away, he would have taken it. (For example, he clearly didn't rate any of the QBs available). I think BB probably likes his accuracy, his knwledge of spread Os and he probably thinks Josh Mc can work with him

 

As for Lawrence, I don't see how we're in for him at all. How can we get him, without unloading 7 draft picks on someone?

Edited by Hunter2_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There’s going to be at least one team picking in the top 3 who doesn’t want a QB. The Pats could go 6-10, pick top 10 and trade up. Maybe not for Lawrence who will probably go 1 but for Fields.

Look at the bengals, lets say they go 4-12. They’re not taking a qb they have Broadway Joe

Edited by CP3MVP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deadpulse said:

@AlNFL19, you work with statistics IRL?

One intro to stats class and excel later...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

There’s going to be at least one team picking in the top 3 who doesn’t want a QB. The Pats could go 6-10, pick top 10 and trade up. Maybe not for Lawrence who will probably go 1 but for Fields.

Look at the bengals, lets say they go 4-12. They’re not taking a qb they have Broadway Joe

Well if it's a non-QB needy team at 1, let's just try and dump 7 picks on them for T-Law. Why settle for 2nd best if we're already in the region. If a QB needy team is 1, 1 and 2 - forget it. This is the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×