Thread: Ryan Mallett Could Be The Next Aaron Rodgers

I'm not talking about character, size, mobility or anything like that. I'm talking about the situation Ryan Mallett is in now and how it compares to what situation Aaron Rodgers found himself in six years ago.

Rodgers, after being considered by many as the best QB in the 2005 Draft, fell all the way to the Packers at 24. The same happened to Ryan Mallet in 2011. Mallett was graded as a mid-first round talent by most people and fell all the way down to the Patriots at 74.

Packers had Brett Favre who was 35 years old at the time, Patriots now have Tom Brady who is 33 years old.

Aaron Rodgers sat three years on the bench behind Favre on the depth chart before he got in the spotlight. In three years from now, Tom Brady would be 36 years old and likely retired.

If anyone can make Mallett into a Pro Bowl QB it's the Patriots. They are known for keeping character issues in check, they have a great overall team. Plus, their coach and a guy named Tom Brady would probably be helpful too.

Blessing in disguise: Why Mallett to Patriots makes sense
By Vic Carucci, NFL.com. Published: April 29, 2011

It will be interesting to see where this goes... The Patriots might look like geniuses once again.

Its a great pick for the Patriots, he can learn from the best about footwork and leadership, then after a few years take over for the Patriots or be traded for a first round pick, if he doesnt work out they can cut him.. Its a low risk/high reward move..

That was the best place for him to go and I still wouldn't have been opposed to us drafting him. I actually still feel he would have been a great fit for our offense and now with the drafting of Rudolph I feel even stronger that he would have been a great QB for the 2 TE offense and apparently NE saw the same thing. They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

Says who? This isn't the first time the Patriots have drafted a QB under Tom Brady's watch. And more than likely won't be the last. There is a reason teams passed over Mallet. When will people learn to stay away from cancers in the locker room?(Though will say this is the one place he could make it due to the Patriots great organization)

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095518

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Thats like saying we got lucky with AD or Percy. Heck, you could even say every team gets lucky that each player works out.

What the Pats did for Brady and what they did with Mallet head is go ahead and know what each player projected to be like and took them when they felt the value was right vs the risk.

Nothing different than what we did with Ponder this year IMHO. We just opted to have a higher risk vs reward ceiling. Same same could be said for Bowers and Tampa.

In the end, he fits their scheme. Pocket passer, doesn't need to move around, just chuck it deep or hit the underneath reads.

Best place for him IMHO, aside from the scheme, they have the leadership to keep headcases in check.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095520

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095518

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Thats like saying we got lucky with AD or Percy. Heck, you could even say every team gets lucky that each player works out.

Hardly. When you draft a 6th round QB, you hope they surprise everyone and pan out, but probably most expectations are they won't. That's whythey drop to the 6th.

What the Pats did for Brady and what they did with Mallet head is go ahead and know what each player projected to be like and took them when they felt the value was right vs the risk.

Yeah, and there was a good chance he'd be like every other 6th rounder and bust.

Remember, at the time they had Drew Bledsoe, who was a pretty good QB. They had the luxury of taking their time and not forcing a QB. Brady wasn't the first QB they took late, nor was he the last one. They did their homework, and just hoped he'd turn into something servicable. I bet they never imagined he'd turn into who he did.

Nothing different than what we did with Ponder this year IMHO. We just opted to have a higher risk vs reward ceiling. Same same could be said for Bowers and Tampa.

You honestly believe taking a QB with #12 is the same as taking brady in the 6th?

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095523

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095520

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095518

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Thats like saying we got lucky with AD or Percy. Heck, you could even say every team gets lucky that each player works out.

Hardly. When you draft a 6th round QB, you hope they surprise everyone and pan out, but probably most expectations are they won't. That's whythey drop to the 6th.

What the Pats did for Brady and what they did with Mallet head is go ahead and know what each player projected to be like and took them when they felt the value was right vs the risk.

Yeah, and there was a good chance he'd be like every other 6th rounder and bust.

Remember, at the time they had Drew Bledsoe, who was a pretty good QB. They had the luxury of taking their time and not forcing a QB. Brady wasn't the first QB they took late, nor was he the last one. They did their homework, and just hoped he'd turn into something servicable. I bet they never imagined he'd turn into who he did.

Nothing different than what we did with Ponder this year IMHO. We just opted to have a higher risk vs reward ceiling. Same same could be said for Bowers and Tampa.

You honestly believe taking a QB with #12 is the same as taking brady in the 6th?

No I honestly don't. Honestly, I am amazed thats what you came up with out of all that.

Read it again and try to focus on the risk vs reward statement.

On a side note, why would they draft someone if they thought he would eventually be "Servicable"?

Reality is, they needed a QB, scouted several, and got one that was on the board in an area that made sense. Doesn't mean that Brady was their only option. If you believe that then you really don't understand how that staff drafts.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095524

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095523

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095520

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095518

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Thats like saying we got lucky with AD or Percy. Heck, you could even say every team gets lucky that each player works out.

Hardly. When you draft a 6th round QB, you hope they surprise everyone and pan out, but probably most expectations are they won't. That's whythey drop to the 6th.

What the Pats did for Brady and what they did with Mallet head is go ahead and know what each player projected to be like and took them when they felt the value was right vs the risk.

Yeah, and there was a good chance he'd be like every other 6th rounder and bust.

Remember, at the time they had Drew Bledsoe, who was a pretty good QB. They had the luxury of taking their time and not forcing a QB. Brady wasn't the first QB they took late, nor was he the last one. They did their homework, and just hoped he'd turn into something servicable. I bet they never imagined he'd turn into who he did.

Nothing different than what we did with Ponder this year IMHO. We just opted to have a higher risk vs reward ceiling. Same same could be said for Bowers and Tampa.

You honestly believe taking a QB with #12 is the same as taking brady in the 6th?

No I honestly don't. Honestly, I am amazed thats what you came up with out of all that.

Read it again and try to focus on the risk vs reward statement.

On a side note, why would they draft someone if they thought he would eventually be "Servicable"?

Reality is, they needed a QB, scouted several, and got one that was on the board in an area that made sense. Doesn't mean that Brady was their only option. If you believe that then you really don't understand how that staff drafts.

Yes, but I'm not talking about risk and reward. I'm simply saying the Pats found a great value pick who panned out. He exceeded everybody's expectations. If people knew he would be a top QB in the league, he wouldn't have slipped to the 6th. You're the one bringing risk and reward into it.

I'm not commenting on the Brady pick, other than the fact it happens. Because they have Brady, they have the luxury of basically ignoring the QB position for 10 years and with their top few picks pick the best players that fit their scheme regardless of position. They can then take some mid-round or late talent and see if one of them can be Brady's successor.

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095525

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095524

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095523

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1095520

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1095518

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1095511

They could be setting themselves up for another decade at QB and another decade of proving you don't always need to draft your QB in the 1st round when you draft for the player/position and not for the need.

One thing worth mentioning about the pats. They got lucky with Brady, I don't think anyone will argue that. He just as easily could have done nothing.

However, SINCE they did get lucky with Brady, they haven't had to worry about QB until now. They can focus on BPA, and shoring up every other spot on their team except QB, which is a luxury very few teams have.

I wish we didn't need to get a QB, because I think other positions in the draft are far better than the QB's available to us at 12 and 43. However, we needed to try for a QB, so we have Ponder. If we got lucky a few years ago with a decent QB, we'd be drafting BPA.

Thats like saying we got lucky with AD or Percy. Heck, you could even say every team gets lucky that each player works out.

Hardly. When you draft a 6th round QB, you hope they surprise everyone and pan out, but probably most expectations are they won't. That's whythey drop to the 6th.

What the Pats did for Brady and what they did with Mallet head is go ahead and know what each player projected to be like and took them when they felt the value was right vs the risk.

Yeah, and there was a good chance he'd be like every other 6th rounder and bust.

Remember, at the time they had Drew Bledsoe, who was a pretty good QB. They had the luxury of taking their time and not forcing a QB. Brady wasn't the first QB they took late, nor was he the last one. They did their homework, and just hoped he'd turn into something servicable. I bet they never imagined he'd turn into who he did.

Nothing different than what we did with Ponder this year IMHO. We just opted to have a higher risk vs reward ceiling. Same same could be said for Bowers and Tampa.

You honestly believe taking a QB with #12 is the same as taking brady in the 6th?

No I honestly don't. Honestly, I am amazed thats what you came up with out of all that.

Read it again and try to focus on the risk vs reward statement.

On a side note, why would they draft someone if they thought he would eventually be "Servicable"?

Reality is, they needed a QB, scouted several, and got one that was on the board in an area that made sense. Doesn't mean that Brady was their only option. If you believe that then you really don't understand how that staff drafts.

Yes, but I'm not talking about risk and reward. I'm simply saying the Pats found a great value pick who panned out. He exceeded everybody's expectations. If people knew he would be a top QB in the league, he wouldn't have slipped to the 6th. You're the one bringing risk and reward into it.

I'm not commenting on the Brady pick, other than the fact it happens. Because they have Brady, they have the luxury of basically ignoring the QB position for 10 years and with their top few picks pick the best players that fit their scheme regardless of position. They can then take some mid-round or late talent and see if one of them can be Brady's successor.

OK, I can try to leave risk reward out of it but it will be hard.

Scenario - Pats have 3 QB's on the board they like.

QB 1 comes up but there are also a RB and a DT they like there as well. Do they take the QB, RB or DT?

The decision is based on the following:
a. What QB do they have further down that they can get.
b. What RB do they have furhter down that they can get.
c. What DT do they have further down that they can get.
d. Can they slide down and still get all 3.

Leaving the risk that is associated with that decision process is hard, but in the end, they decide based on the scenario that plays itself out the best.

In this case they've let the QB slide as far as they think they can without someone else coming up with their own matrix that says its time to take the QB.

same applied here for Mallet head as it did when they picked Brady.

Fact of the matter is, they drafted Brady when they did because their matrix probably told them there was a good chance he would wind up going to another team late or as a FA.

The Vikings on the other hand don't seem to be prepared to take that risk, especially when you look at the Ponder and TE picks.