Could Jimmy G have won SB53 on the Pats?

Does Garoppolo come away with the lombardi against the Rams?

  • Yes, he gets it done

  • No, he fucks it up


Results are only viewable after voting.

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,929
Pittsburgh, PA
Alternative-history debate I was having with another Pats-fan friend today. Why not pose it here, what the hell else are we doing right now.

Suppose Brady rips the still-beating hearts out of Atlanta fans in SB51, eats it on live TV like he did... and then promptly retires after the game, considering his job to be done. And who would have blamed him? Jimmy G, the heir apparent, actually inherits.

Garoppolo starts 16 games in 2017 and 2018, on a cap hit comparable to Brady. The rest of the core team stays the same - and why wouldn't it. We successfully convince him not to make as many stupid runs, and so he avoids tearing his ACL. We more or less saw what he was across his 24 starts to-date for SFO: good accuracy, fast read of a play, great mobility, but enough overconfidence that he makes more than his share of ill-advised throws and thus INTs.

I don't think JG leads that comeback against Jacksonville, but maybe he does. He probably doesn't get within sniffing distance of the SB against the Eagles like Brady did, but either way my friend and I agree that nobody was beating KC in that 2018 AFCCG except Brady.

But what about the super bowl? Put him on that team, with that defense, and with the huge coaching mismatch of Belichick vs McVay. Can Jimmy convert a few extra third downs with his legs? Can he avoid the mistakes that Brady did, allowing the defense to gradually put LA to the sword? If he needed to break their back with a perfect seam throw to Gronk, could he have made it happen? That game was such a defensive face-crush by Gilmore, McCourty, Van Noy et al, so much more of a blowout than the final score ever indicated, that I think an average NFL QB would still win that game 7-8 times out of 10. He thinks most QBs fuck it up somehow, and that JG was put in a similar situation with a similarly dominant defense this year, and when he needed to (A) salt away a 10-point 4Q lead, and then (B) lead a comeback to salvage the game after fucking it up, he failed on both counts. But then again, that wasn't with Belichick on his sideline.

Counterfactuals by definition can't be proven, but I'm curious what most people think here.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,244
Could Belichick and the rest of that team have won SB53 with Jimmy G as their quarterback? My answer is a resounding Yes.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
5,864
It might have taken the Rams 10 quarters to score 10 points the way the Pats defense and gameplan was in Goff's head that night, so I'll go with yes.

But as you said, no way they beat KC to even get to that super bowl with Jimmy.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,238
Hingham, MA
I’ll say yes. I think if they replayed that game 10 times with Brady, the Pats win 7-8 times and most are by a bigger margin. That should have been a 3 score win minimum. So I think Jimmy would also have beat the Rams more often than not in that game.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,072
Melbourne, Australia
I think Brady used up all his bullets in the AFCCG and that by the time the Super Bowl came he had very little left.

I think Jimmy Garoppolo would’ve been able to do the job in the Super Bowl - indeed a good QB gets it done by way more than 10 points, but I agree with @tims4wins there is no way he would’ve gotten there. Brady’s AFCCG game is a Top 4 all time performance, behind only his two SB comebacks and maybe one of Joe Montana’s SBs.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
2,248
In the simulacrum
It might have taken the Rams 10 quarters to score 10 points the way the Pats defense and gameplan was in Goff's head that night, so I'll go with yes.
For this particular game, this is really the essence of it.

In retrospect, the job of the quarterback in that game was to not screw up the thrashing the defense was bringing down. Yes, Brady is probably the single best quarterback in the history of football for the needs of this particular game: don't mess up. But I think Jimmy could have handed the ball off to Sony Michel OK (and he might have even avoided floating that ball to Hogan). Also, this game was an incredibly low bar in some ways -- given the punting from Allen, he barely even had to create field position, all he had to do was not Winston it.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,753
Mansfield MA
For this particular game, this is really the essence of it.

In retrospect, the job of the quarterback in that game was to not screw up the thrashing the defense was bringing down. Yes, Brady is probably the single best quarterback in the history of football for the needs of this particular game: don't mess up. But I think Jimmy could have handed the ball off to Sony Michel OK (and he might have even avoided floating that ball to Hogan). Also, this game was an incredibly low bar in some ways -- given the punting from Allen, he barely even had to create field position, all he had to do was not Winston it.
Brady actually created a lot of field position that game, it's just that Hekker reversed it almost every punt. It's possible that a bunch of three-and-outs would have put LAR in excellent field position shape, leading to more points for the Rams.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,026
Definitely. Any QB that isnt named Jameis Winston should win that game.

But, like people have said, it's all moot. They dont sniff the SB that season without the heroics of Thomas Brady.
 

nolasoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,026
Displaced
That one game? Sure, why not. At that point, Garoppolo was already a more than capable game manager.
 
Last edited:

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
8,692
The Yay Area
Brady actually created a lot of field position that game, it's just that Hekker reversed it almost every punt. It's possible that a bunch of three-and-outs would have put LAR in excellent field position shape, leading to more points for the Rams.
bingo. The pats sort of secretly dominated that game, but turnovers and an insane punting job by the rams hid that. I’d say jimmy G is a soft “maybe” on 53, but no chance he beats KC on the road to get there.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,024
The Pats had 12 meaningful offensive drives that game, plus 2 kneel downs (end of half and end of game). The starting field position position on those drives: 39*, 12, 19, 37, 17, 27, 8, 29, 25*, 31, 4*. The first two asterisks were the result of kickoffs, while the last was from the Gilmore interception. The remaining 9 were the result of Hekker punts, which resulted in an average starting position at the 20 yard line. The time the Pats started at the 37, the Rams punted from their own 9. The 29 was a result of Hekker punt from his own 6. The best starting field position was the opening kickoff.

Where the Pats ended those drives:

start: own 39. End: 34 (int)
start: own 12. End: 28 (missed FG)
start: own 19. End: 40 (punt)
start: own 37. End: 24 (FG)
start: own 17. End: own 25 (punt)
start: own 27. End: 32 (downs)
start: own 8. End: own 49 (punt)
start: own 29. End: own 34 (punt)
start: own 25. End: 44 (punt)
start: own 31. End: TD
start: own 4. End: 24 (FG)

There are a couple of things I can conclude:

a.) Had the Rams pulled out a victory, Hekker should have been the game's MVP hands down.

b.) After the opening INT, the Pats offense truly "failed" on 2 of those drives. I consider failure the inability to reach midfield. The drive where they reached their own 49 started at their own 8, so doesn't really qualify.

So the result is that for 9 of the team's 12 drives, the Brady-led offense did its job. Brady remarkably did not throw a single pass on the final drive, as the Pats running game had its way against a tired Rams D. So Brady gets credit for 8 of 12. Brady wasn't perfect by any means. But after that opening INT his line reads 21-34 for 262 yards, which would translate to an 85.7 passer rating. Not vintage, but not much different from his first Super Bowl either.

So, Garappolo could have won the game, but I don't think it's a slam dunk either. Another interception or even an untimely sack could have easily changed the game, and Brady was flawless on both fronts for his final 34 pass attempts (1 sack for 9 yards). But JG would not have beaten Mahomes in OT in Arrowhead Stadium.
 
Last edited:

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,238
Hingham, MA
The Pats had 12 meaningful offensive drives that game, plus 2 kneel downs (end of half and end of game). The starting field position position on those drives: 39*, 12, 19, 37, 17, 27, 8, 29, 25*, 31, 4*. The first two asterisks were the result of kickoffs, while the last was from the Gilmore interception. The remaining 9 were the result of Hekker punts, which resulted in an average starting position at the 20 yard line. The time the Pats started at the 37, the Rams punted from their own 9. The 29 was a result of Hekker punt from his own 6. The best starting field position was the opening kickoff.

Where the Pats ended those drives:

start: own 39. End: 34 (int)
start: own 12. End: 28 (missed FG)
start: own 19. End: 40 (punt)
start: own 37. End: 24 (FG)
start: own 17. End: own 25 (punt)
start: own 27. End: 32 (downs)
start: own 8. End: own 49 (punt)
start: own 29. End: own 34 (punt)
start: own 25. End: 44 (punt)
start: own 31. End: TD
start: own 4. End: 24 (FG)

There are a couple of things I can conclude:

a.) Had the Rams pulled out a victory, Hekker should have been the game's MVP hands down.

b.) After the opening INT, the Pats offense truly "failed" on 2 of those drives. I consider failure the inability to reach midfield. The drive where they reached their own 49 started at their own 8.

So the result is that for 9 of the team's 12 drives, the Brady-led offense did its job. Brady remarkably did not throw a single pass on the final drive, as the Pats running game had its way against a tired Rams D. So Brady gets credit for 8 of 12. Brady wasn't perfect by any means. But after that opening INT his line reads 21-34 for 262 yards, which would translate to an 85.7 passer rating. Not vintage, but not much different from his first Super Bowl either.

So, Garappolo could have won the game, but I don't think it's a slam dunk either. Another interception or even an untimely sack could have easily changed the game, and Brady was flawless on both fronts for his final 34 pass attempts (1 sack for 9 yards). But JG would not have beaten Mahomes in OT in Arrowhead Stadium.
Yeah and let’s not forget that Gost missed a FG on the second drive, and then (quite possibly as a result of that) the Pats passed up a ~47 yarder toward the end of the half. Then add in Brady’s pick and they should have had 22 points on the board right there.

Of course the Rams also missed a FG, threw a pick inside the Pats 30, and had the Cooks/JMC play, so that kind of stuff evened out to a degree.
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
8,692
The Yay Area
I thought Hekker had an argument as MVP even in the loss, frankly. He almost singlehandedly prevented his team from getting routed. Got some lucky bounces, sure, but that’s the residue of preparation and practice.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,929
Pittsburgh, PA
"could" here in the sense of "would you expect him to do so, if he'd been put in that position", as I thought obvious.

We could all be living in a simulation, but most questions aren't asked to that level of philosophical uncertainty.