Patriots plan on handling internal quarterback situation ‘behind the scenes’
A lot of the talk around the New England Patriots to this point in the offseason has been about how the team will handle the quarterback position. At lot of that has centered around the team adding a quarterback or quarterbacks, but there is also the matter of the two guys still on the roster who started games for the Patriots last year – Mac Jones and Bailey Zappe.
During his media availability on Tuesday morning, Patriots de facto general manager Eliot Wolf was asked about the team’s plan at quarterback, and how having those two players still under contract may impact the ultimate decision.
READ MORE:
—How will Eliot Wolf ‘weaponize’ the Patriots’ offense?
—Which pending free agent the Patriots view as a ‘cornerstone’ player
—Full 2024 NFL Combine preview
“I’d say there’s a lot of options on the table,” Wolf said. “I’m glad you asked about Mac and Bailey. We’re not going to be a program that’s talking about these guys in terms of – through the media. We’re going to do what’s best for the team behind the scenes. And the strategy of that is going to be myself, [head coach] Jerod Mayo, and [director of player personnel] Matt Groh. We’re going to try to do the right thing for the team.”
While Wolf stuck do that and didn’t say anything more about Jones or Zappe by name, there were some comments that could be inferred to be about the team’s current quarterback room. One that stood out to many was Wolf’s explanation of the importance of body language at the quarterback position, something Jones has been criticized heavily for over the last two years.
“Body language on the field is very important at that position,” Wolf noted. “You don’t want a guy that’s throwing his hands up after a bad play, or you can you can see him physically pointing at somebody. Body language is important. Everybody’s looking at the quarterback.”
Wolf also talked about the importance of investing in a quarterback high in the draft, which could be a sign the team is ready to move on. “When you look throughout the league, most of the quarterbacks are first-rounders,” he said. “The league-wide understanding of how important that position is, and how important it is to have somebody there that can help you win games and get over the hump has changed league wide.”
This week at the Combine will go a long way in the Patriots determining if that kind of quarterback exists in this draft, and if that’s who they want to use the third overall pick on. What are the traits they’re looking for? Offensive coordinator Alex Van Pelt discussed that last week, which we broke down here.
Which NFL Draft quarterbacks best fit what Alex Van Pelt says he's looking for
L-R: UNC quarterback Drake Maye, Patriots offensive coordinator Alex Van Pelt, LSU quarterback Jayden Daniels (All photos via USA Today)
Shortly after he was hired as the New England Patriots’ new offensive coordinator, it was reported by NFL Network that Alex Van Pelt will have “a heavy hand” in helping pick the team’s next quarterback. That begs the question – what does he value and what is he looking for at the position?
During his introductory press conference on Wednesday, Van Pelt was asked that question not once, but twice. In those two answers, he laid out the early parameters of what traits stand out to him at the position.
READ MORE:
—Mac Jones reportedly still has believers inside Gillette Stadium
—Why Jerod Mayo chose to grow the Patriots’ coaching staff
—Who will be calling plays in 2024?
“Smart, tough, and a leader…I mean, obviously there’s accuracy in the pass game and mobility and decision-making,” Van Pelt replied when asked to describe his ideal quarterback. “The physical attributes are obviously important, but if a guy is a great leader and can come in and make good decisions and throw the ball accurately, those are all pluses.”
Later on, Van Pelt was asked what traits he looks for when evaluating quarterbacks. “Again, it just goes back to decision -making, accuracy, the fundamentals, mechanics – if the guy sound. A big one again, is leadership,” he explained. “The big piece for me is the leadership, the toughness, the accuracy, and the decision-making.”
That all brings us to the NFL Draft. If the Patriots do decide to take a quarterback, which guys this year are the best fit? Do any of the players further down the board check more of these specific boxes than the guys at the top? To find out, let’s look at the best players in the draft at each individual trait Van Pelt named, trait by trait. However, we’ll do so with two caveats.
First, we’re not going to include USC quarterback Caleb Williams in our rankings. As the clear-cut projected top pick, the Patriots likely won’t have a shot to draft him. Even if they do want to trade up for him that’s a move that would likely be telegraphed ahead of time.
Also, although it’s the trait Van Pelt highlighted the most, we’re not going to rank quarterbacks by ‘leadership.’ Not because it’s not important – it certainly is – but that’s not something that can be seen on tape. Only those in the locker rooms with these quarterbacks really know what kind of leaders they are, and for the most part teammates or coaches don’t knock lack of leadership in public leading up to the draft. For the Patriots, it will be important to learn more about what makes all the quarterbacks tick and their leadership styles through pre-draft interviews, but for the purposes of our little experiment here we’ll call that an ‘unknown variable.’
Moving on from that, we’ll rank the top three players for each trait Van Pelt mentioned, in the order he mentioned them – intelligence, decision-making, toughness, accuracy, mobility, and throwing mechanics. From there, we’ll come up with an aggregate score based on that (top player gets three points, middle gets two, third gets one), and see who has the highest score at the end.
One more thing, and I can’t stress this enough – I didn’t go into this trying to cook the final results. There is no pre-determined order (honestly I ended up surprised with the final result, and don’t agree with it). I did my best to give my honest opinion on each trait, and then let the cards fall where they may.
Football intelligence
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA – NOVEMBER 04: Michael Penix Jr. #9 of the Washington Huskiesat United Airlines Field at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum on November 04, 2023 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)
1. Michael Penix, Washington
2. Bo Nix, Oregon
3. Drake Maye, UNCPenix and Nix have both seen a lot of football, and it shows in the way they play. They’ve both run multiple offenses and display a good understanding of how defenses will try to attack certain offensive concepts, both pre- and post-snap. Maye sneaks on as a less-experienced quarterback, but had a good amount on his plate in the context of UNC’s offense this year. Some of the plays he made when the original call broke down showed he had a deep understanding of where all 10 of his teammates were on the field at all times.
Decision-making
Oct 21, 2023; Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA; LSU Tigers quarterback Jayden Daniels (5) looks to pass against the Army Black Knights during the first half at Tiger Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Danny Wild-USA TODAY Sports
1. Jayden Daniels, LSU
2. Michael Penix, Washington
3. Michael Pratt, TulaneThis trait is tough because it’s hard to say any of the top quarterbacks have ‘decision-making’ as a carrying trait. That being said, Daniels does a very good job in reading the field to limit potential turnovers throwing the ball, with just seven interceptions in 715 passes over the last two years, while posting a turnover-worthy play rate of just 1.6 percent. He does need to make better decisions as a runner though, and keep himself out of harms way more often.
Toughness
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON – NOVEMBER 11: Michael Penix Jr. #9 of the Washington Huskies passes against the Utah Utes during the second quarter at Husky Stadium on November 11, 2023 in Seattle, Washington. (Photo by Steph Chambers/Getty Images)
1. Michael Penix, Washington
2. Drake Maye, UNC
3. Jayden Daniels, LSUPenix is far and away the leader here. For all of the games he missed due to injury, there are more most players probably should have missed but he played through whatever was ailing him. Multiple times this season he took big hits in the pocket, and would come back a player or two later and deliver a big-time throw. The hits also added up – he’s the most-pressured quarterback of any in this year’s class with PFF having him at 577 pressured dropbacks. He’s also shown great mental toughness given his roller coaster career path.
Maye faced his own increased pressure, playing behind a UNC offensive line that struggled at times. Still, he made the most of his opportunities and stayed in games. Meanwhile, Daniels took a beating this year (which was at times his own fault) but maintained a high level of play throughout the season.
Accuracy
EUGENE, OREGON – SEPTEMBER 23: Quarterback Bo Nix #10 of the Oregon Ducks passes the ball against the Colorado Buffaloes during the second half at Autzen Stadium on September 23, 2023 in Eugene, Oregon. (Photo by Tom Hauck/Getty Images)
1. Bo Nix, Oregon
2. Michael Penix, Washington
3. Jayden Daniels, LSUNix set an NCAA single-season record for completion percentage in 2023 at 77.4 percent, narrowly surpassing Mac Jones’ old record by 0.84 percent. While most of that was done on shorter, higher-percentage passes (Nix had the lowest average depth of target among draft-eligible quarterbacks this year at 6.8 yards per attempt), Nix truly was lasered in and didn’t miss any layups. Plus, he did show good touch on the rarer occasions he sent the ball down the field.
Daniels and Penix make this list because of their accuracy to specific parts of the field – parts that are harder to hit for most quarterbacks. Penix is the best deep ball thrower in this class, and his downfield accuracy is a big part of that. Daniels’ accuracy outside the numbers at all levels is a plus in his game.
Mobility
Quarterback Jayden Daniels 5 runs the ball as the LSU Tigers take on Georgia State in Tiger Stadium in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, November 18, 2023. (Scott Clause/USA TODAY Network)
1. Jayden Daniels, LSU
2. Drake Maye, UNC
3. J.J. McCarthy, MichiganAgain, another category where there’s a clear favorite. Daniels isn’t just a mobile quarterback, he’s a threat and a game changer with the ball in his hands as a runner. Last year alone he ran for 1,134 yards and 10 touchdowns. That skill projects to translate very well to the NFL as long as Daniels stays healthy.
Maye can make plays with his legs and be a factor on the ground, but he’s not the kind of explosive threat that Daniels is. The same can be said for McCarthy, whose running mechanics make him more of a factor as a runner than it may intially appear.
Mechanics
ORLANDO, FLORIDA – SEPTEMBER 03: Jayden Daniels #5 of the LSU Tigers looks to throw a pass with pressure from Kalen DeLoach #4 of the Florida State Seminoles in the first quarter at Camping World Stadium on September 03, 2023 in Orlando, Florida. (Photo by Julio Aguilar/Getty Images)
1. Jayden Daniels, LSU
2. Spencer Rattler, South Carolina
3. J.J. McCarthy, MichiganThere are some quarterbacks with beautiful mechanics in this class, some with very wonky mechanics, and not much in between. Daniels, Ratter, and McCarthy all have quick, compact, and consistent releases. While there may be a few nuts and bolts to tighten up when they get to the pros, all three are relatively advanced in this regard for where they are in their careers.
Final results
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA – NOVEMBER 25: Jayden Daniels #5 of the LSU Tigers celebrates a touchdown during the second half against the Texas A&M Aggies at Tiger Stadium on November 25, 2023 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. (Photo by Jonathan Bachman/Getty Images)
Jayden Daniels: 11 points
Michael Penix: 10
Drake Maye: 5
Bo Nix: 5
Spencer Rattler: 2
J.J. McCarthy: 2
Michael Pratt: 1Again, this is an imperfect science. There’s a lot here we don’t know.
For one, we don’t know how much Van Pelt values one trait over another. When asked on Wednesday if he’d put them in order, he replied “you could switch them either way.” We gave equal value to each one, but putting increased emphasis on one or two traits would change the results. Plus, there’s that unknown of the leadership intangible.
It’s also possible there are other traits Van Pelt values that he did not mention. Key quarterbacking skills that did not come up from ability to handle pressure and arm strength to physical traits like build/size and durability. Scheme fit also wasn’t mentioned (although Van Pelt sounded flexible about building his final scheme around his quarterback). Ironically, all of these traits would have had Maye ranked at or towards the top, which may explain his surprisingly low score.
That all being said, not only did Daniels finish with the highest score but he also appeared in the check box for every trait but one. A sign of things to come? Or a reason not to trust ‘the math’? It also may not end up mattering if the Washington Commanders end up taking him second overall.
For more on this year’s quarterback class, you can check out our 2024 quarterback big board and individual scouting reports here.
