Remember when we thought we got the better of the Dorsett trade? We sent them an average NFL starting QB, with upside, on a rookie contract. Sure it was win-win - we couldn't get full value out of Jacoby for obvious reasons, and have gotten more value out of Dorsett - but man that could end up being a massive win on their end. At least we can console ourselves that it wasn't Ryan Grigson on the other end getting the credit and bragging about taking Belichick to the cleaners.
SoSH demands answers. Now, we won't get those answers, but at least we're demanding ones to the right questions.
White privilege?
I mean, it's definitionally "his fault" that he sucks. That said, he didn't trade three picks to draft himself.
You're not wrong.
Is it really that big of a difference between 3-4 and 4-3 or is it more that winning game #7 when you're a (more or less) .500 team is better than losing game #7?
While it's undeniably true that Brissett has been good, it's hard to overstate the importance of a good offensive line. I don't know that Brissett looks as good if he had the Patriots' OLine instead. And I think it's likely that Brady would look a heck of a lot better if he had Indy's line.
I'd call it a necessary but not sufficient condition. Oakland, for example, is #3 at run blocking, #7 at pass protection, and Carr keeps on fumbling or throwing picks. Giants are #11 in both, etc. Bad line play can make you underrate a QB, but good line play doesn't suddenly make a QB avoid bad decisions and make more-precise throws. What's impressed me most about Brissett is how solid his decision-making is. He's not going to make jaw-dropping Aaron Rodgers-style throws, but he makes the highest-percentage play really really often.
Perhaps you're right, I'd have to dig up the thread. But at the time I remember people being astounded that we got even a warm NFL-level body back for our third-string QB - and they attributed it to just having a Patriots halo effect on anyone playing for the team. "former first-rounder getting a chance to make good!" was one summary of Dorsett that I remember. Seemed like lottery tickets going both ways, frankly, but at the time I thought SoSH's opinion is that we got something for what was, at the time, almost of no value to us. And then 8 weeks later we unloaded Jimmy too and our QB depth was down to "uh, Hoyer?". But in the moment it felt like dealing from a position of such strength that we gave up almost nothing.
Sure, but Brissett would never have had that value on the Pats because he would have seen no playing time as Brady's backup. If Brissett had stayed on the Pats, his current value would probably be more or less the exact same as it was at the time he was traded.
Thanks. My quick summary of opinions there:
Insurance has value even if you never use it, for the same reason that options have value. Would Brissett have done better than Hoyer if Brady had eaten shit anytime in the last 2 seasons since Garoppolo was traded? I'd have to say, on present evidence, that the answer is "probably". He's playing better right now - in terms of decisions, precision, even some DB misdirection - than I've ever seen Hoyer play.
