The Tom Brady Effect

[SFL Cat]

How many wins do you think it will cost the Pats now that Brady won't be playing again this season?

I'm thinking 3-4.

[EagleFan]

I guess costing them 3 wins sounds about right, 5-11?

[Daimyo]

I'm guessing they finish 10-6 and lose in the divisional round of the playoffs to San Diego or Jacksonville.

[molson]

10 Wins on the season, so the injury will cost them 3-4 wins.

I think in another season with stronger schedule, it might cost them more.

[samifan24]

I think Matt Cassel will do pretty well as the starter, especially given the quality of the players around him. I'm not sure how many wins losing Brady will cost the Pats but I think Cassel will do his part towards helping the team.

[Jas_lov]

They will win the division with 10-11 wins. Matt Cassel will be a field general to be reckoned with. The Patriots are too good to just fall off the map especially with the easiest schedule in football.

[EagleFan]

The Favre led Jets win the division and the Pats watch the playoffs from their couch.

[Galaril]

I saw the Pats 12-4 but with Brady out they 10-6 with a +/-1 win range. They may have a close fight though for that division title the way the Bills looked. Certainly they won't have homefield or most likely a bye week this time around. One more big injury like Welker, Adalius Thomas, Seymour, Maroney etc. and this team is a 8-8 team.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

They will win the division with 10-11 wins. Matt Cassel will be a field general to be reckoned with. The Patriots are too good to just fall off the map especially with the easiest schedule in football.

How th efuck by the way did the Pats get one of the easiest schedules in the league? A team goes 18-1 and they get a joke schedule. That really is a sign the NFL is only about the star teams. What a joke.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Galaril

How th efuck by the way did the Pats get one of the easiest schedules in the league? A team goes 18-1 and they get a joke schedule. That really is a sign the NFL is only about the star teams. What a joke.

Jets, Dolphins, Bills twice each (enough said).

Plus when a team is 16-0 that pretty much cuts down the winning percentage of the rest of the league.

[Big Fo]

I'll guess that New England will go 9-7, and miss the playoffs by one game to the Jets. Before the injury they were a 12-13 win team IMO.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Galaril

How th efuck by the way did the Pats get one of the easiest schedules in the league? A team goes 18-1 and they get a joke schedule. That really is a sign the NFL is only about the star teams. What a joke.

Strength of schedule has very little to do with the previous year's W/L record. Only two games are decided by your place in the standings.

Otherwise, you play your own division (AFC East sucks), a rotating NFC division (NFC West is pretty bad), and a rotating AFC Division (AFC West sucks).

[Cringer]

Preseason doesn't mean a ton, so I couldn't even guess how Cassel will do. I will guess they end up 10-6 though.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Galaril

How th efuck by the way did the Pats get one of the easiest schedules in the league? A team goes 18-1 and they get a joke schedule. That really is a sign the NFL is only about the star teams. What a joke.

So you honestly think the the NFL:

1. Decides who plays who, not according to any formula, but on a whim
2. Those decisions are motivated to help the Patriots.

In any event, you're completely wrong on both.

-6 games against your division
-4 games against an NFC division (rotates every year, so you play each division every 4 years)
-4 games against an AFC division (rotates every year)
-2 games against the other AFC teams that finished the same spot in their division standings that you did.

[Shkspr]

We'll just put it this way: rumor has it that a "B. Bellicheck" has just put in a trademark application for the T-shirt phrase "10-7".

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by molson

So you honestly think the the NFL:

1. Decides who plays who, not according to any formula, but on a whim
2. Those decisions are motivated to help the Patriots.

In any event, you're completely wrong on both.

-6 games against your division
-4 games against an NFC division (rotates every year, so you play each division every 4 years)
-4 games against an AFC division (rotates every year)
-2 games against the other teams that finished the same spot in their division standings that you did.

And in an NFL that sees several teams got to the playoffs every year that were not in the playoffs the year before, those last two games can be anywhere from easy or hard any given year it seems. No matter what that spot it is locking you into those teams.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Cringer

And in an NFL that sees several teams got to the playoffs every year that were not in the playoffs the year before, those last two games can be anywhere from easy or hard any given year it seems. No matter what that spot it is locking you into those teams.

Ya, there was a time where there was so much parody that those 2 games didn't really seem to do what they were intended to do.

But things have been pretty stable in the in the AFC over the last 5 years. The Pats have played the Colts, Steelers and Chargers pretty much every year.

[SFL Cat]

Be interesting to see whether the Pats stick with Cassel if he struggles, or they make a move to pick up an experienced free agent or engineer some kind of trade.

[Racer]

I think the Patriots will go 9-7 or 10-6 now. Before Brady went down, I would have guessed a 13-3 or a 14-2 season for them.

[Mantle2600]

Don't know if anyone remembers last years game of NE & CLE but towards the end of the game Anderson was spiking the ball if I remember correctly and Vrabel came rushing in and ended up hitting Anderson in the legs before getting punked by Steinbach. The Patriots said it was a clean play. Funny how when it happens to your team it's then considered dirty.

[Ryan S]

Originally Posted by samifan24

I think Matt Cassel will do pretty well as the starter, especially given the quality of the players around him. I'm not sure how many wins losing Brady will cost the Pats but I think Cassel will do his part towards helping the team.

I am not so sure. The guy only threw 33 passes in four years at USC. Can a Superbowl favorite afford to have a player with so little experience at any level stating at QB?

[SFL Cat]

^^^ okay...that was funny! Just don't ever drive alone anywhere in Charleston, IL, though.

[cmp]

I say 11-5. They still have plenty of talent.

[Sublime 2]

I still see the team winning 11. The schedule looks easy, and the talent level is still very high.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Mantle2600

Don't know if anyone remembers last years game of NE & CLE but towards the end of the game Anderson was spiking the ball if I remember correctly and Vrabel came rushing in and ended up hitting Anderson in the legs before getting punked by Steinbach. The Patriots said it was a clean play. Funny how when it happens to your team it's then considered dirty.

I don't see the Pats fans or players really up in arms about the hit.

[claphamsa]

I think cassel comes in and shows brady to be a system QB. Hell throw for 4K and win 13 games. Brady is just a pin up!

[stevew]

I thought they would win 14 easily before. Now I'd guess around 8 gimme wins and about 12 total but they could still win 14

They still have a good team.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

I'd say 33 passes at USC is kind of like 4 years starting at Eastern Illinois.... only, you know, with actual responsibilities.

I LOL'd

SI

[wade moore]

I think the Pats will fair well. I agree with the poster that said 10-6 with a +/- of 1. I see them in the 9-11 win range. They're still a very good defense with a ton of offensive talent.

I didn't get to see Cassel play this weekend, but his numbers looked pretty solid. If he can just not botch it they will be fine in the regular season. Playoffs could be tough though.

[jeheinz72]

I think the Pats go 12-4 but drop in the playoffs to the Bolts.

I don't think anyone in the East is any good (and I'm a Dolphins fan). Even the Jets aren't that great. People talk of the difference Favre made...well if it wasn't for a little luck (getting hit as he threw and the ball sailing right instead of going into the group of players as Favre actually intended) and a lack of faith by Sparano in the offense (understandably) the game against Miami could've gone into OT (could've kicked the FG from the 2 and then the last drive could've tied it with a FG).

Pats 12-4
Buffalo 9-7
Jets 7-9
Miami 4-12

[ISiddiqui]

I think the Patriots will go 9-7... and they'll run quite a bit more.

[Kodos]

The Pats will still win the AFC Least, due to a total lack of quality in that division.

[Autumn]

Cassell did fine, yes. But consider that from now on people will be gameplanning against him. That will make a big difference, I expect his performance will deteriorate.

I Heard they were calling Chris Simms, and so it's very possible they'll move Cassell back down now that they know the injury is season ending.

[MikeVic]

I predict the Pats go undefeated and win the Super Bowl. Wouldn't that be something.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

I think cassel comes in and shows brady to be a system QB. Hell throw for 4K and win 13 games. Brady is just a pin up!

It sure will be interesting if he, Casell, does well. The system QB talk will begin.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Galaril

It sure will be interesting if he, Casell, does well. The system QB talk will begin.

Makes you wonder.. which do Patriot fans want?

1) Cassell to do just as well as Brady, Patriots win another superbowl and Brady's "legacy" is tarnished forever as just a system QB as you put it.

2) Cassell to do ok but not anywhere near Brady's level, the Pats end up 9-7, make the playoffs but lose out prior to the superbowl

3) Cassell to bomb, Patriots don't even make the playoffs but Brady is seen in a new light by even non-Pats fans as perhaps being the glue that held the team together.

[jeheinz72]

D) Cassel blows a knee in Week 2 and the Pats go 1-15.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Makes you wonder.. which do Patriot fans want?

1) Cassell to do just as well as Brady, Patriots win another superbowl and Brady's "legacy" is tarnished forever as just a system QB as you put it.

2) Cassell to do ok but not anywhere near Brady's level, the Pats end up 9-7, make the playoffs but lose out prior to the superbowl

3) Cassell to bomb, Patriots don't even make the playoffs but Brady is seen in a new light by even non-Pats fans as perhaps being the glue that held the team together.

I don't think that hard about it. I certainly wouldn't root for Cassell to do poorly just for the sake of Brady's legacy. I've love for Cassell to have an MVP year. I'm a fan of the Patriots ahead of being a fan of any individual player.

At the end of the day though, if the Pats are on, I'll drink some beer and just hope they win. So that's what I want.

[Kodos]

I kinda hope he flops miserably.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Cassell did fine, yes. But consider that from now on people will be gameplanning against him. That will make a big difference, I expect his performance will deteriorate.

I Heard they were calling Chris Simms, and so it's very possible they'll move Cassell back down now that they know the injury is season ending.

How much can they gameplan for him at this point? 2nd half of the season, sure, if he's still the starter, but nobody knows what he's like or how the offense is gonna be at this point.

Alan T's question really helps highlight why people have been so aggravated by "Patriots fans" over the past couple years. Clearly you're hanging out with the most ludicrously fairweather non-football fans if they'd rather see Brady's legacy enhanced than their team win football games.

Simms and Rattay are in Foxboro getting physicals from what I've heard, but no plans to sign either yet (at some point, the Pats need to sign one of them or Gutierrez. We can't seriously be considering Kevin Faulk or Wes Welker as our 3rd QB.)

[SteveMax58]

I say 1-2 wins on the year difference...with about 3-4 close calls.

I'd say 3-4 wins if not for their soft schedule, but I think this Pats team ends up with a similar type of season as 2003. Run the football, defense plays tough, and Cassel plays well enough to not lose. I think his stats will probably end up better than his play would indicate, but overall he'll be serviceable enough to get to, and lose, in the playoffs.

[Autumn]

I think they can gameplan for him plenty, in the sense of "gameplan for a backup QB who nobody needs to worry particularly about." I think a defensive gameplan vs the Brady Patriots is a lot different than a gameplan vs. Less Than Average QB Patriots. He's essentially a rookie, and they'll do all the pressure they put on rookies, making him make the reads and plays that Brady usually would and Cassel probably won't.

[SFL Cat]

Gameplan ... bah ... just blitz the guy until he shows you he can beat it.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Gameplan ... bah ... just blitz the guy until he shows you he can beat it.

Don't look now but that's actually a game plan...

[SFL Cat]

DOH!

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I think they can gameplan for him plenty, in the sense of "gameplan for a backup QB who nobody needs to worry particularly about." I think a defensive gameplan vs the Brady Patriots is a lot different than a gameplan vs. Less Than Average QB Patriots. He's essentially a rookie, and they'll do all the pressure they put on rookies, making him make the reads and plays that Brady usually would and Cassel probably won't.

I'm sure the blitz percentages will be upped a bit, but you need to know what formations the Pats will be running to scheme effectively. And now even I don't know how they'll look the next few weeks. A big point talked about for why Cassell is the starter is that he knows the system, which is highly spread-heavy, implying they'd keep running the same basic package of formations. At the same time, it's natural to run the ball more and employ more max-protect schemes, but those would be out of what, an I-formation (I think we used an I twice all last year). We also don't really have the TE depth/quality we used to to run a stereotypical ball control 2-TE offense. The final factor, if we stay in the spread, is that under Brady his strength was getting 5-6 yards every play. Under Cassell, it was big-play dependent (SSS obviously). Do you really want to blitz and leave Randy Moss (and to a lesser extent Welker short) in 1v1 coverage deep? That's about as big a gift you can give any inexperienced QB, as the chances of him hitting a couple bombs is IMO greater than sustaining the 5-6yd chunks-type drives the Pats were known for under Brady. Add in the main RB Maroney being more boom/bust than we'd want to see, I would be tempted to play a pretty straight defense and make Cassell beat you every play by making the right timing throw than letting him mess up 50% of the time and get bailed out with big plays.

[Daimyo]

When you play a guy like Brady or Manning the defense really needs to get pressure mainly from the front four. If those guys need a lot help to pressure the QB, you have to take guys out of coverage. A QB of Brady's caliber will find that opening almost every time and get rid of the ball quickly, making the defense pay for blitzing.

In that sense, defensive game plans will definitely change. The Pats can run the same plays as before, but the defense will essentially get an extra guy for blitzing or playing the run.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

We can't seriously be considering Kevin Faulk or Wes Welker as our 3rd QB.)

Welker has already shown he can do placekicking duties. Why not give him a shot at QB?!

[molson]

I figured a lot of people here would be interested in picking up one of these:

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

There's no way #1 happens. No way.

Best possible outcome is Cassel doesn't lose any games for us, and the rest of the offense and the defense step up and the team wins the SB.

That is much more unlikely than #1 I think.