The Pats have adopted a “Brady plays every snap” approach over the years, and I understand the rationale for rewarding him for a week of prep, but now that we are headed into the later years of his career, isn’t it smart football to get the backup QB in there late in blowouts to (i) save Brady some wear and tear, (ii) prevent TB12 from getting injured and (iii) get the kids some reps?

It’s a tough one because there were only a couple games that didn’t come down to the end last year. So maybe in the Steelers and Ravens blowouts Mallett should’ve gotten in there, but those teams have a long history vs. Brady so you can understand why Brady might’ve remained in the game.

I don’t think you need to save wear and tear on Brady unless it’s a 2009 Saints blowout situation. Otherwise you can’t send that message that he’s more important and needs to be preserved to your team. Same goes with injury. BB will never be one to coach (or draft for that matter) based on fear of injury.

Cassel had limited game reps before being thrust into the fire in 2008. Look, if Brady goes down, things are going to change. The offense will be tweaked for Mallett/Garoppolo and we just have to accept there will be a learning curve. No amount of garbage reps running the offense as it’s meant for Brady would prepare any backup for a starting role.

The smart way to approach Brady’s age is exactly what they’re doing. Keep the talent stocked behind him, especially with a player like Garoppolo who could, in theory, manage a game similarly to how Brady did it in 2001.