Via Ian Rapoport:
Source: The #Patriots have agreed to terms with QB Jacoby Brissett, who gets $8M on a 1-year deal.
Moderator: Team Captains
Source: The #Patriots have agreed to terms with QB Jacoby Brissett, who gets $8M on a 1-year deal.
It's not a matter of IF NE drafts a QB but which one of the top 3, Williams, Maye and Daniels, they end up with. They WILL bring in another veteran to add to Zappe and Rourke. Rourke WILL NOT emerge from camp as #2 because no HC in his ever loving mind, especially a first time HC, would ever put himself in that situation. Imagine Mayo trying to explain to Robert Kraft that he thought it was a good idea to backup the new rookie QB who has never taken a regular season NFL snap with another QB who has never taken an NFL snap? Talk about a CLM.DanoT wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 5:09 pmThe way I look at it, with Mac Jones gone that's one less QB that Rourke has ahead of him on the depth chart. For sure the Pats draft a QB but not for sure they sign a veteran QB. So perhaps 1st round drafted QB starts and Zappe and Rourke battle it out for backup QB.
Heard that rumour yesterday. That would certainly do it.SammyGreene wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 5:42 pmSo this confirms it’s Rourke and Zappe battling out for #3?
Via Ian Rapoport:
Source: The #Patriots have agreed to terms with QB Jacoby Brissett, who gets $8M on a 1-year deal.
OV:54-40 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 8:15 pmSo, likely - vet journeyman Brissett (with way more losses than wins as an NFL starter) gets #1 to mentor and be a stop-gap till the 1st round draft pick is "ready" (hope they don't draft another Ryan Leaf). Leaving Nathan to battle it out with Zappe for #3 / PR guy? Not sure I like Rourke's chances there. He might be better off to hope getting cut early there and hope to end up with another NFL team with less on the QB depth chart ? Still believe he will stick it out down there for at least a couple of more years, even if just off & on PRs.
As a bridge QB the question re: Brissett is how long will the bridge be? It could be 3 games, 8 games or no games if they feel their soon-to-be-prized rookie is ready to go for Wk 1. One downside for Rourke is the makeup of their TC QB room. Last year in Jacksonville there were only the 3 QBs. Lawrence as the established starter didn't take many reps in preseason leaving Beathard and Rourke to share the bulk of the ex-game reps. This year will be much different. The rookie will get a lot of playing time as will Brissett although he should be familiar with the offense as new Pats' OC Alex Van Pelt was the OC in Cleveland in 2022 when Brissett started 11 games while DeShaun Watson was sitting out his suspension. Familiarty between Brissett and Van Pelt no doubt played a role in his signing. With NFL cutting back to 3 preseason games and the need to get preseason playing time for the new guy and Brissett there will be a lot few reps left over for Zappe and Rourke to split than Rourke enjoyed in Jacksonville.Toppy Vann wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2024 8:26 amThe only upsides here it seems are:
1. the bridge QB hasn't had a stellar career yet.
2. IIRC isn't Rourke able to make over US$900,000 if hangs in.
I don't grasp the stupidity of the NFL at times when it comes to stupid rules and this one has to be one of the dumbest.Hambone wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 9:29 pmI see where the NFL is considering tweaking their emergency 3rd QB rule so that teams could use a PS player as opposed to having to activate the player to the 53 man active roster to be available for emergency use. The biggest benefit would be that teams wouldn't have to pass the QB back thru waivers to assign him back to the PS. That still doesn't protect the team from the possibility of another team raiding their PS of said QB
My take on the stupid NFL overtime rules is that it is driven by the TV broadcasters who don't want the football broadcast eating into the next TV program in their schedule. So get the game decided quickly in OT is the goal.Toppy Vann wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 8:38 amI don't grasp the stupidity of the NFL at times when it comes to stupid rules and this one has to be one of the dumbest.Hambone wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 9:29 pmI see where the NFL is considering tweaking their emergency 3rd QB rule so that teams could use a PS player as opposed to having to activate the player to the 53 man active roster to be available for emergency use. The biggest benefit would be that teams wouldn't have to pass the QB back thru waivers to assign him back to the PS. That still doesn't protect the team from the possibility of another team raiding their PS of said QB
Admittedly, this is not as dumb as their best ever dumb rule for OT where they let a coin toss determine OT as all the team had to do then was kick a FG knowing their opponent wasn't getting a shot.
The NFL has no money issues so why not just expand to 47 with 3 QBs.
The NFL may have no money issues but they didn't arrive at that situation by burning $1M per team per season to have a player on their game roster they have no plans to use other than in a case of total emergency. They don't even like to use their #2 unless thay are forced to. In 2022 pre the new 3QB rule only 12 teams chose to have 3 QBs on their 53 man active roster. At the start of the 2023 season with the emerg 3QB rule in effect that number jumped to 13. There were still 19 teams who chose not to carry a 3rd QB on the 53. 6 of the 13 who started out with 3 on the 53 never saw their #3 take a snap all season.Toppy Vann wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 8:38 amI don't grasp the stupidity of the NFL at times when it comes to stupid rules and this one has to be one of the dumbest.Hambone wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2024 9:29 pmI see where the NFL is considering tweaking their emergency 3rd QB rule so that teams could use a PS player as opposed to having to activate the player to the 53 man active roster to be available for emergency use. The biggest benefit would be that teams wouldn't have to pass the QB back thru waivers to assign him back to the PS. That still doesn't protect the team from the possibility of another team raiding their PS of said QB
Admittedly, this is not as dumb as their best ever dumb rule for OT where they let a coin toss determine OT as all the team had to do then was kick a FG knowing their opponent wasn't getting a shot.
The NFL has no money issues so why not just expand to 47 with 3 QBs.
Rourke will likely have to beat Zappe to be No. 3 QB and spend another season on the PR, behind whoever the Pats draft with the third overall pick and newly signed veteran free agent Jacoby Brissett.Dusty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 8:53 amWhen I read about the new NFL rule on 3QB, I wondered how it would impact Nathan. Assuming the Pats use their #3 pick on a QB, they will already have 4 QB's in camp. Rourke will have to pass Zappe to #2 spot to dress for a game as I would imagine that the rookie QB will hold the Emerg QB spot.... since there is no risk in plucking a high pick off the PS if he is listed as emergency #3 QB.
Or is there another impact to the new rule?
The only thing I see as changing this year is the team doesn't have to promote the 3rd QB from the PS to the 53 to be able to get him into the game on an emergency basis. That means he doesn't have to clear waivers to be reassigned to the PS. I'm not reading anything that says a QB on the PS can be "red-circled" as emergency 3QB and protected from raiding. He'd never even get to the PS because in order to get him there they'd first have to release him at the end of training camp and hope he clears waivers. There is zero chance he'd clear waivers.Dusty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 8:53 amWhen I read about the new NFL rule on 3QB, I wondered how it would impact Nathan. Assuming the Pats use their #3 pick on a QB, they will already have 4 QB's in camp. Rourke will have to pass Zappe to #2 spot to dress for a game as I would imagine that the rookie QB will hold the Emerg QB spot.... since there is no risk in plucking a high pick off the PS if he is listed as emergency #3 QB.
Or is there another impact to the new rule?