The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
10,599
San Francisco
While it is true that Mac got no help from his line, I think it’s clear he is also lost out there most of the time. He looks skittish in the pocket, has terrible footwork, doesn’t seem to feel the rush, holds the ball too long, and doesn’t seem to go through his progressions to find open receivers. Playing QB in the NFL at a high level is something only a handful of guys can do, Mac just may not be one of them. I’ve been incredibly disappointed in his clear regression this year with no sign of any progress.

All of that said, I’m still fine with them continuing to play him, to see if he can break out of this and show some progress. I know everyone wants to see Zappe and maybe from a fan’s perspective that would be more fun, and maybe Zappe is better than Mac. But I still think figuring out whether to move on from Mac or not is the most important thing right now.

Now if this is all Mac has and he’s handed the starting job next year again without any kind of meaningful competition for the position, then I‘ll start to wonder what’s going on.
This is more where I am. I am thinking the Pats probably need a new starting QB after this year, but should probably give Mac the rest of the year to prove he is or is not the guy.
Zappe was a fun story, but after watching him implode and turn back into a rookie 4th rounder in the second half against Chicago, I am not sure why he deserves the starts any more than Mac. I mean if Zappe would have come in during the Chicago and won the game going away, I would like to think BB would stick with him.
Zappe was so much fun to watch when the Pats crushed the Lions and Browns. He was Mac level bad against the Bears.
 
Apr 24, 2019
1,259
I still think it behooves the team to see THREE SOLID YEARS of Mac. That's not to say don't go looking for other possibilities if this trend continues through the end of this season, but it's a pretty quick hook to give up on a guy who looked promising as a rookie then had a rough sophomore campaign behind an extra leaky line with poor coaching, installing a new-ish system.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,543
Mac is Jimmy G good enough to run a very good offense with an elite defense but will probably still make some terrible throws every game but if things break down, nope.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,200
The Coney Island of my mind
I still think it behooves the team to see THREE SOLID YEARS of Mac. That's not to say don't go looking for other possibilities if this trend continues through the end of this season, but it's a pretty quick hook to give up on a guy who looked promising as a rookie then had a rough sophomore campaign behind an extra leaky line with poor coaching, installing a new-ish system.
I agree if "what behooves them" roughly translates to "they don't really have much of a choice." Unless they really think Zappe has the "it" factor, and there's not much reason to, what are the options for moving off of Mac that don't smell of desperation?
 

FL4WL3SS

my name sucks
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,598
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
If they are going to make a change, this is the week to do it. However, I'm with RW that you let it ride this year.

Zappe actually might be really good, having him take a season to learn on the bench and then bring in competition next offseason to see if he can win the job isn't the worst thing. He also might be terrible, who knows. I do find it odd, however, that Mac has gotten such a long leash here and some folks know for certain that Zappe isn't the answer after one bad game. Let him try and win the job, it's wide open at this point.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
856
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Well, they won the game. The line sucked. Mac is messed up this year. It’s better to win than lose under such circumstances, and a couple of turnovers might have done that.
Agreed. Mac is fortunate at how much margin for error the spectacular defensive and special teams efforts gave him. Otherwise, we'd be fixating on his deficient accuracy on critical throws (to Bourne early, Stevenson on the wheel route in the 1st half and Thornton early in the 2nd half) when the line gave him time and failure to go through his progressions more quickly.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,243
Boston
He was Mac level bad against the Bears.
The entire team was awful and even then they initially rallied when he came in. This thought process is crazy to me-
Because the rookie QB in his 4th career game couldnt rally the team in bad weather he’s unlikely to be effective in the future? After being as good as could be hoped in the first 3 games!

More to the point of this thread-
I think the Pats still need to see at least another couple weeks of Mac to further evaluate. He was very good as a rookie and game managed the past couple weeks to wins. At the same time, he hasn’t improved they’re not winning because of him. If the Patriots keep winning and they’re 8-5 or 9-6, sure keep sticking with Mac. But if there’s no improvement and they are 6-6, I’m ready to get more looks at Zappe also. If Mac’s not improving, and they’re not winning, let’s look at someone who may be able to.
 
Apr 24, 2019
1,259
Watching Brady (I'm not comparing the two players) struggle with legit offensive weapons due to a porous OL is instructive. Shitty coaching, piss-poor protection and ZERO weapons not named Rhamondre is a tough combo for any QB, especially a second-year signal-caller who's leagues WORSE than Brady and learning a new system.

Side note: Is it possible that a part of Isaiah Wynn's struggles this season is that he's a little put-off by the position change and he's just being a petulant little baby, not buying in (or a percentage of that) b/c, if so, FUCK that guy.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,200
The Coney Island of my mind
Watching Brady (I'm not comparing the two players) struggle with legit offensive weapons due to a porous OL is instructive. Shitty coaching, piss-poor protection and ZERO weapons not named Rhamondre is a tough combo for any QB, especially a second-year signal-caller who's leagues WORSE than Brady and learning a new system.

Side note: Is it possible that a part of Isaiah Wynn's struggles this season is that he's a little put-off by the position change and he's just being a petulant little baby, not buying in (or a percentage of that) b/c, if so, FUCK that guy.
If nothing else, I would imagine Wynn's agent has mentioned to him that petulance during a walk year isn't a winning strategy.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,543
The one thing I will say about Mac is that without Parker he literally doesn't have a WR that can win contested catches. Roughly half of Zappe's production was a result of Parker winning contested catches. Meyers understands how to win vs. zone, Thornton can run by guys, Bourne is effective in space but no one on the team outside of Parker can high point catches so perhaps he would be slightly more successful with a healthy Parker. Of course a healthy Parker is a fleeting thing to begin with.
 

Bowser

lurker
Sep 27, 2019
274
The OL has been awful. He has been skittish and lost BECAUSE the OL has been awful. AND - he's played poorly regardless of that. It's not a great recipe.
An awful OL is reason to play the QB with better pocket awareness, better footwork, who seems to see the field better, and who makes quicker decisions, no? At this point, I think that's Zappe.
I do find it odd, however, that Mac has gotten such a long leash here and some folks know for certain that Zappe isn't the answer after one bad game. Let him try and win the job, it's wide open at this point.
This is exactly where I am. And where I was last week, too.
 

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
10,599
San Francisco
If they are going to make a change, this is the week to do it. However, I'm with RW that you let it ride this year.

Zappe actually might be really good, having him take a season to learn on the bench and then bring in competition next offseason to see if he can win the job isn't the worst thing. He also might be terrible, who knows. I do find it odd, however, that Mac has gotten such a long leash here and some folks know for certain that Zappe isn't the answer after one bad game. Let him try and win the job, it's wide open at this point.
Yeah, this is what I tried to convene in my post (and probably failed). Let me Mac have the rest of this year. And if Zappe keeps improving, he can win the job in training camp next year. This is all based on Mac continuing to show no improvement.
The best case scenario is that Mac gets it together before the end of the year and Zappe keeps improving and learning during his rookie year. Then the Pats could have two decent QBs.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,492
Needham, MA
I don’t see anyone saying for sure that Zappe isn’t the answer. Who knowS? It’s unlikely that he’s markedly better than Mac, but of course there’s a chance that he’s much better, I suspect we’ll find out at some point.

Either way this team is going nowhere. Best case scenario they are a fringe playoff team. I think what people are saying is that figuring out whether Mac can play or not outweighs the maybe 1-2 wins Zappe gets you that Mac doesn’t even in the best case scenario for Zappe and worst case for Mac. As a fan I would probably vote for Zappe at this point because Mac has shown me nothing, but I understand why they aren’t making that move right now.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
5,953
Overland Park, KS
Good NFL QBs make plays out of structure or when the pocket breaks down. Offensive line play sucks all over the league. Joe Burrow has better weapons but his line sucks and he makes way more plays than Mac. When was the last time we have seen Mac scramble himself free and make a play?
 

Strike4

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,575
Portland, Maine
During the game they kept showing the stat where the Pats had more plays for negative yards than the Colts. That's pretty stunning in a 26-3 game where the Colts had nothing going on and shows how riven with issues the offensive line is. Mac's issues are definitely real but there's problems elsewhere that aren't helping him.
 
Feb 8, 2017
119
Mac is Jimmy G good enough to run a very good offense with an elite defense but will probably still make some terrible throws every game but if things break down, nope.
Mac aspires to be Jimmy G; Jimmy G is accurate into tight windows over the middle of the field. Mac looked really off with his accuracy today, even when he did have time to throw.
 

Granite Sox

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
4,936
The Granite State
Virtually every offensive pass play was a jailbreak into the backfield. They couldn’t run between the tackles because there were no holes. They tried to run/pass laterally (a few pitch sweeps and some jet/end around action to Bourne) but that went nowhere due to the Colts’ speed save for one Stephenson run. They tried a few screens after the initial success to Smith and that didn’t work. Bourne fumbled. Myers fumbled. I get that McCorkle didn’t play great, but he managed to the scoreboard and didn’t turn the ball over. Given the complete disaster that is the Pats offense right now, just win, baby.

Zero rhythm to the offense. Patricia had a shit game. The stats on first down plays are shocking. It’s a minor miracle they won. After Stephenson, Jones was the LEAST of their worries today on offense.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,543
Good NFL QBs make plays out of structure or when the pocket breaks down. Offensive line play sucks all over the league. Joe Burrow has better weapons but his line sucks and he makes way more plays than Mac. When was the last time we have seen Mac scramble himself free and make a play?
Burrow's weapons are across the board better than Mac with about an equivalent OL. Burrow sucked vs. CLE when Garret lived in the backfield. Don't think Burrow with 3 elite WR, very good RB and good TE are a good comparison for NE with Stevenson + Flotsam/Jetsam & Meyers

A more comparable QB this season would be Aaron Rodgers who has below average WR/OL & probably an equivalent RB group. Rodgers just threw up against the worst Def in the NFL.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
856
Stumptown via Chelmsford
With its 24th game in the books, the Mac-led offense has a median efficiency of 2.0 points. Since the maximum number of drives in a 4-quarter game appears to be 12, the points ceiling on a Mac-led offense appears to be 24 points.

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 24 points or more, the Patriots are 1-8 (with the lone win at the Chargers last year).

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 20-23 points, the Patriots are 1-1 (win at Texans last year, loss at Dolphins this year).

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 17-19 points, the Patriots are 1-2 (win at Jets last week, losses at Dolphins and vs Bucs last year).

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores less than 17 points, the Patriots are 10-0.

Going 3-11 when the opponent scores 17 or more points is a discouraging stat. Mac at the helm of the offense puts a lot of pressure on the defense, and makes it that much harder to beat the higher-powered teams in the league.
 
Last edited:

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
86,789
Oregon
With its 24th game in the books, the Mac-led offense has a median efficiency of 2.0 points. Since the maximum number of drives in a 4-quarter game appears to be 12, the points ceiling on a Mac-led offense appears to be 24 points.

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 24 points or more, the Patriots are 1-7 (with the lone win at the Chargers last year).

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 20-23 points, the Patriots are 1-1 (win at Texans last year, loss at Dolphins this year)

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores 17-19 points, the Patriots are 1-2 (win at Jets last week, losses at Dolphins and vs Bucs last year)

In games with Mac as the starter when the opponent scores less than 17 points, the Patriots are 12-0

Going 3-9 when the opponent scores 17 or more points is a discouraging stat. Mac's offense puts a lot of pressure on the defense, and makes it much harder to beat the teams in the league with better offenses.
LOL ... "Mac's offense." Yep he's playing 1 on 11 out there, designing and calling all the plays as well.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
42,157
Melrose, MA
They needed 2 wins before the bye to keep any chance whatsoever at making the playoffs alive, and they got the wins despite terrible offensive line play.

No good reason to think Zappe could have done better.

He hasn't played behind a line as awful as what Mac has dealt with for the past 2 weeks. At the end of his last game, he was routinely getting his passes batted down at the line. Mac's by far largest flaw this season has been that he is turnover prone, and Zappe has also been turnover prone. Since the terrible pick in CHI that got him benched, Mac has taken better care of the ball.

The bye week comes at a good time. They need to fix the line and Mac before facing the Jets again on the 20th.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,032
Good NFL QBs make plays out of structure or when the pocket breaks down. Offensive line play sucks all over the league. Joe Burrow has better weapons but his line sucks and he makes way more plays than Mac. When was the last time we have seen Mac scramble himself free and make a play?
Burrow is one of the best QBs in the league. Mac isn't now and will never be as good as Joe Burrow.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
11,680
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
To me it's simple: when Zappe played the pass protection looked demonstrably better and I don't think that's just coincidence or a function of the quality of the opposition. I can't be a "pressures/sacks are a QB stat" guy in theory but not in practice. Mac looks completely lost in the pocket.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
42,157
Melrose, MA
To me it's simple: when Zappe played the pass protection looked demonstrably better and I don't think that's just coincidence or a function of the quality of the opposition. I can't be a "pressures/sacks are a QB stat" guy in theory but not in practice. Mac looks completely lost in the pocket.
There is also personnel changes on the line, which has struggled in both run and pass blocking.
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
669
To me it's simple: when Zappe played the pass protection looked demonstrably better and I don't think that's just coincidence or a function of the quality of the opposition. I can't be a "pressures/sacks are a QB stat" guy in theory but not in practice. Mac looks completely lost in the pocket.
I won't deny EJ's point about personnel and the line's play but I do think both can be true.

I haven't rewatched any tape but there were a couple times yesterday when the pocket "broke down" as NFL pockets do after a couple few seconds, and it looked like there was space to step UP towards the LOS and make a throw, or at least try to be more clear of the bodies. Mac would get spooked and bring the ball down and try to escape out to the side, usually wrecking his footwork in the process. (Started to notice this more also: he doesn't shift his feet well, when he has to escape, even from slight pressure, it's more tuck and run, requiring a complete reset if he wants to get a pass off.)

It may have been in the interest of ball security, Bill's probably made it clear that is objective #1 for him right now. But also noticeable given it's a skill that appeared plus for Zappe, who seemed pretty comfortable in traffic all things considered.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,663
Someone who knows better can answer the question...."on the plays where he checked down (many) were there receivers open earlier. But just not open "enough" for Jones's liking?" Un willing to make tough throws might be as bad as unable.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
51,544
Someone who knows better can answer the question...."on the plays where he checked down (many) were there receivers open earlier. But just not open "enough" for Jones's liking?" Un willing to make tough throws might be as bad as unable.
We can't answer that til the all-22 film. Evan Lazar usually will have a piece up sometime the day after the game with this analysis.

And that's all well and good about making "tough throws" but what makes those tough is that they are more likely to be intercepted. And that also leads to backlash. He has to find the sweet spot.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Dope
May 20, 2003
34,686
Deep inside Muppet Labs
We can't answer that til the all-22 film. Evan Lazar usually will have a piece up sometime the day after the game with this analysis.

And that's all well and good about making "tough throws" but what makes those tough is that they are more likely to be intercepted. And that also leads to backlash. He has to find the sweet spot.
I think this goes back to being too deep in his own head and a loss of confidence. He's too busy thinking and not busy enough playing. He's struggling to go through his progressions because it appears he's not confident in doing so.

He did have the nice gainer to Henry over the middle later in the game which was good to see, but before then it was downright painful watching him try to go through his progressions.
 

Arroyoyo

lurker
Dec 13, 2021
417
There are a lot of smart people on this forum that watch a lot of football.

With that in mind, it really does surprise me, for whatever reason, that we have people trying to argue that the reason Mac is so terrible is the O-line. As if it’s not completely obvious Mac has no pocket awareness, a startling inability to step into throws, and a weak arm that seemingly makes him reluctant to try to fit passes into tight spaces.

When you combine all of those negative attributes, you get a quarterback that can’t compete at a high level in the NFL. How some very smart people here seemingly can’t see that surprises me with each passing week where we see the same results over, and over, and over, and over…

He’s not a playmaker. We will never compete for a championship with him short of having an all-world defense. How isn’t this obvious by now? When other teams put up even moderate points with Mac behind center for us, WE LOSE. Almost every time.

Why is Mac worse this year? It’s simple: he’s being asked the make NFL starting quarterback level plays. Last year he had training wheels on, this year they’re off. Remember, we heard reports that this offense was redesigned to be more like what he did at Alabama. I’m not buying all of these weak excuses as to why his play has tanked (though it’s funny when folks act as if last year he was some world-beater), and, honestly, some of the apologetic-type posting here regarding Mac is getting so cringy my eyes are about to roll out of my head.

If Mac were on the Jets and playing the way he plays for the Patriots we would be cracking endless jokes about the “same ole Jets.” Can we be objective when one of our own is terrible? I get it - but look at his laundry! - but frankly I’m ready to see him wearing someone else’s because I miss having a competitive Patriots squad.
 
Last edited:

Arroyoyo

lurker
Dec 13, 2021
417
I mean, c’mon, folks. We’re beyond the halfway point. The guy can’t play in this league at an elite or consistently-competitive level.

He’s a good kid. But being a good kid doesn’t win playoff games.

 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,663
Given the number of not-shitty NFL QB's that were shitty for more than their first 1.5 NFL seasons, I think this is a little extreme.
When you combine all of those negative attributes, you get a quarterback that can’t compete at a high level in the NFL
 

Dr. Gonzo

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2010
4,740
There are a lot of smart people on this forum that watch a lot of football.

With that in mind, it really does surprise me, for whatever reason, that we have people trying to argue that the reason Mac is so terrible is the O-line. As if it’s not completely obvious Mac has no pocket awareness, a startling inability to step into throws, and a weak arm that makes him apparently scared to try to fit passes into tight spaces.

When you combine all of those negative attributes, you get a quarterback that can’t compete at a high level in the NFL. How some very smart people here seemingly can’t see that surprises me with each passing week where we see the same results over, and over, and over, and over…

Why is Mac worse this year? It’s simple: he’s being asked the make NFL starting quarterback level plays. Last year he had training wheels on, this year they’re off. Remember, we heard report this offense was redesigned to be *more like what he did at Alabama.* I’m not buying all of these bottom-barrel excuses as to why he can’t product, and, honestly, some of the apologetic-type posting here is getting so cringy my eyes are about to roll out of my head.
Mac can certainly perform better. No argument there. However, even with the INTs, I was really encouraged by the Baltimore game because you could see an offense that had the potential to compete in a track meet with an above average offense. Then Mac got rolled up. Since then, he played a quarter against the Bears and a full game against the Jets and Colts.

I'm not sure why opponents and injuries' shouldn't be used to provide context to his performance. The Jets D is legit and just held the future NFL MVP to 18/34, 205 yards, and 2 INTs. Allen was only able to use his legs to move the ball. Against the Colts, a team that is second in the league in terms of YPC allowed, the starting center was out and the LG was benched. The Colts D line manhandled the Pats O line most of the afternoon. Mac left some plays on the field, Stevenson down the sideline and Thornton down the field as well come to mind. He did make some plays when protection broke down and I only remember one play, the throw to Meyers that was tipped up and almost caught, that was an egregious decision.

Long story short, context does matter. I'm looking forward to the Jets game after the bye. A division game at home that has playoff implications. Really curious to see what the offense can do with everyone healthy against a really good D.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
22,213
Right now the Patriots can win with Mac playing like he is. But they’ll have to be excellent in special teams and on defense, and be able to run the ball well also. That’s asking for a lot of things to go right.

And I’m as big a Mac supporter as this board has. He’s got to improve in a major way. I’m still of the long term view and am willing personally to give this process time. But right now, Mac isn’t playing very good football. Period.
 

Arroyoyo

lurker
Dec 13, 2021
417
Hey, look, I’m happy that some folks here are optimistic. I don’t get it, but I’m happy to see it.

But when we’re rebuilding with a new QB 2-3 years from now because the team (and some of its fans) took too long to come to terms with what their eyes and the stat sheet says today, we’ll have to stop and remember why the rebuild took so long.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
14,803
UWS, NYC
So here's a question -- given a shitty OL, is it more dangerous to play:

1.) The guy who's showing poor pocket awareness and bad footwork, or...
2.) The guy who's only six feet tall and was continually getting passes batted down

I think Zappe brings at least as many problems for a line that can't give him a clean pocket.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,663
Hey, look, I’m happy that some folks here are optimistic. I don’t get it, but I’m happy to see it.

But when we’re rebuilding with a new QB 2-3 years from now because the team (and some of its fans) took too long to come to terms with what their eyes and the stat sheet says today, we’ll have to stop and remember why the rebuild took so long.
Too long? So lets say Bill Belichick wakes up this morning and has Mac Jones killed because he sucks so badly at football. When do they get this new QB you speak of? Probably after the season, right? IOW, playing him right now has almost no bearing whatsoever on the rebuild that will become necessary if Jones turns out to be a mistake. Unless you think Zappe is the answer. Or that they should have realized Jones was no good before *this* season?
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,166
South Dartmouth, MA
So lets say Bill Belichick wakes up this morning and has Mac Jones killed because he sucks so badly at football. When do they get this new QB you speak of? Probably after the season, right? IOW, playing him right now has almost no bearing whatsoever on the rebuild that will become necessary if Jones turns out to be a mistake. Unless you think Zappe is the answer.
Seconded. And if Mac really is this bad...playing him will speed up the rebuild a la tank mode. Unless, of course, Zappe is the "next guy." Which, I don't think he is. Im fine riding this entire year with Mac and seeing if he, the line, and the offense can gain a lot of momentum heading into next year. If they look this way the last month of the season, and they don't cut bait...I'll have a lot of questions.
 

Arroyoyo

lurker
Dec 13, 2021
417
Yes, I’d say play Zappe. You seem to ask for patience with a guy that’s played in two dozen NFL games yet lose patience with the guy that had one bad half in a lost game in shit weather that he didn’t start.

Checks out.
 

Arroyoyo

lurker
Dec 13, 2021
417
What I’d like to know by year’s end is if either Mac or Zappe are the guys. You play Mac you gain nothing while going into next season with open questions about Zappe.

Let’s see what we have in Zappe. If he blows then we scratch both of them (well, Zappe as QB1) and draft or trade for QB1.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
16,878
Hey, look, I’m happy that some folks here are optimistic. I don’t get it, but I’m happy to see it.

But when we’re rebuilding with a new QB 2-3 years from now because the team (and some of its fans) took too long to come to terms with what their eyes and the stat sheet says today, we’ll have to stop and remember why the rebuild took so long.
First, the fans have zero to do with how Bill deals with the team's QB situation. We should know that by now.

Second, you are making an assumption that Zappe is a better option this year, which may not be the case. For now, I'm willing to let Bill make that call; he's got a track record of being pretty good at such things.

Finally, if Mac shows zero improvement the rest of this season, then the Pats will obviously need to consider moving on. But they could just as easily do that next season; no requirement that they wait 2-3 years to do so. And, Geno Smith....
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,216
What I’d like to know by year’s end is if either Mac or Zappe are the guys. You play Mac you gain nothing while going into next season with open questions about Zappe.

Let’s see what we have in Zappe. If he blows the we scratch both of them (we’ll, Zappe as QB1) and draft or trade for QB1.
I understand this line of thinking, but we’re at most a couple weeks into giving it any legitimate consideration in my opinion. If you think that Mac’s career through say the Baltimore game was enough to decide they wasted a first round pick on him, we’re looking at it differently. Especially if the narrative is that they’ve just this season taken the training wheels off and suck because they’re seeing if he can respond.
 
Last edited:

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
43,892
What I’d like to know by year’s end is if either Mac or Zappe are the guys. You play Mac you gain nothing while going into next season with open questions about Zappe.

Let’s see what we have in Zappe. If he blows then we scratch both of them (well, Zappe as QB1) and draft or trade for QB1.
You can post the same post over and over, yelling into the void - nobody that we follow is accountable in any way to any of us - and arguing with imaginary Jones stans.

Or you can do something bold and step up:

https://www.patriots.com/press-room/contact-us
 

phineas gage

lurker
Jan 2, 2009
49
I enjoyed watching Zappe in his two games subbing for Jones and agree that he showed some nice pocket presence. However, being realistic, I think it is far more likely that he was drafted as a Hoyer replacement rather than a starter, As bad as Jones has been, he's still light years better than Cam, and if the defense and special teams stay at a high level, there are still enjoyable things to watch in Patriots games this season. As many others have observed, they are not going anywhere this season anyways, so they may as well make the best use of the time by obtaining resolution on the QB issue.