It’s hard to imagine the New England Patriots without Tom Brady under center. With the exceptions of the Deflategate suspension and his ACL injury, those who follow the Foxboro-based football team have watched Brady lead the offense since early in 2001.
Now, all of that has changed, as the Patriots turn to Jarrett Stidham or Brian Hoyer to lead their team into the 2020 campaign.
Fans and pundits alike are left wondering just how the team will perform in their first year without their franchise quarterback.
ESPN’s Mike Reiss has mentioned that some close to the organization believe that the Patriots could be better without Brady in the picture. That statement is a strong one, but it’s one that seems to be gaining steam.
“They’re better off without him,” Fauria said. “Can I tell you why? And it has nothing to do with Brady’s skillset. It’s not because he’s not good or he can’t throw it or he’s lost some speed on his fastball. It’s because where he was in his career, his age, what he wanted to achieve, and what the Patriots were trying to achieve were completely different. So it was never going to work out. They were never going to see eye to eye.
“This offense is not going to be able to move forward with Brady as the quarterback, not because he sucks. Those throwaways were important. It’s because he wasn’t willing to adapt. There’s the difference. He wasn’t willing to let N’Keal Harry grow.”
What both Reiss and Fauria are saying makes some sense.
At this point in Brady’s career, he’s not going to repeatedly go back to young, unproven wide receivers if they make a mistake. He’s going to force it to the guys who have performed for him when he needed them. In New England, that was Julian Edelman, Rob Gronkowski, and James White.