Comments on: Could the Patriots beat the Giants without Tom Brady?

By: Michael Daly

Michael Daly — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:41:33 +0000

From what I’ve seen of Cassel he can play, albiet not at the level of Brady.

We’re kind of assuming Brady may not play in the Superbowl here - I don’t buy that; I think he’ll be there healed up enough that his mechanics won’t hurt him.

By: Max Kliman

Max Kliman — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:50:02 +0000

Well maybe Matt Cassel is a lousy quarterback. We haven’t had a lot of time to look at him. If he is in the Patriots orginazation than he probably isn’t that bad but you never know.

By: Bill Burt

Bill Burt — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:50:18 +0000

Jason
This is not so much a knock on the Giants, though I guess it could be perceived that way from the south of Hartford perspective, but rather a look at the Patriots.
Is it all about Tom Brady? Is this an 8-8 team without Tom Brady?
It is an interesting debate.
My guess if Brady wasn’t playing, Las Vegas would put the game at about even. My guess.

By: JasonW

JasonW — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:54:22 +0000

Let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine, set for 4 weeks ago. The question is: can the Patriots beat the Giants WITH Tom Brady?
The answer is: barely.

Here’s hoping for another exciting game.

By: Bill Burt

Bill Burt — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:06:52 +0000

And unless they had a lousy quarterback, I believe they would be better than 8-8 or 9-7. I think with the offense they have they would be 11-5 at worst with a decent QB and 8-8 with me at QB.

By: Bill Burt

Bill Burt — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:06:01 +0000

Max
I’d just like to see how good this team is, in other areas, without Brady. It might be a good test next season, though he appears to be on a Brett Favre run (never missed a start). I know guys like Mike Vrabel would love the challenge.

By: Max Kliman

Max Kliman — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:30:08 +0000

The pats would probably win without Brady. They have too many good players to lose to the Giants. But no, if the Patriots didn’t have Brady they would definatly not be a great team. To tell you the truth, I think that the Pats would go 8-8 or 9-7 without Brady.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:34:50 +0000

Could they beat the Giants? Of course they could. They wouldn’t be the favorite, but of all the teams with annonymous backup quarterbacks, the Pats are best equipped. With receivers like Moss and Welker and one of the best offensive lines in the league, any NFL backup would feel pretty comfortable stepping in.

By: Jim-red sox nation west

Jim-red sox nation west — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 00:01:50 +0000

Eli took the giants to the bowl and he is only a little above average as a QB. We really dont know about Cassell except that he is being taught by the best. The Pats are much better at every other position…so i would have to say that the pats would still win w/out Brady…but lets not try it!

By: Bill Burt

Bill Burt — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:18:03 +0000

I almost believe that a bunch of Pats players would welcome the opportunity.
This is not to say that Brady isn’t the best, maybe all-time, but you get my point.
As for the Super Bowl, you want to go with your best. History doesn’t ask for excuses or injuries. It says who won the game and the loser is usually forgotten.
An interesting top nonetheless.