Felger: If only Garoppolo hadn’t gotten hurt . . .

Given all the circumstances -- Jacoby Brissett playing nearly twice as much as Jimmy Garoppolo, Rob Gronkowski being a non-factor, Dont'a Hightower getting hurt, etc -- the Patriots' 3-1 record over the first month was an accomplishment. Not many teams could pull that off, and the Pats should feel good about where they sit.

I still can't help being disappointed with how it turned out with Garoppolo.

By the time the Pats hit the second quarter against the Dolphins Sept. 18, it really looked like we were on to something. A probable 4-0 record. Entertaining football. A young player staking his claim as either your QB of the future or a damn valuable trade chip. It was compelling stuff.

Garoppolo could obviously still be of great value, either here or elsewhere, but the momentum has been lost. The quality of play on offense dipped dramatically the last two weeks, and we were subjected to over 10 quarters of a college-level scheme behind Brissett. Worse, questions were raised over Garoppolo's ability/willingness to play through the injury, and whether that's fair or not, the team did nothing to dispel it either publicly or through the reporting that emanated out of Gillette. It was all capped off with the ultimate indignity: A shutout loss at home at hands of Rex freaking Ryan.

The mood has changed with the Garoppolo story, and you wonder if we'll ever get it back. Probably not. That feeling you got entering the second quarter against Miami -- the future, the promise, the possibilities -- could have taken us right to Brady's return this week and been a subplot to the entire season. That may have been aggravating for Brady, but good stuff for the rest of us. And while the Pats' 3-1 record is really good, it's not the quite the statement that 4-0 would have been. And that statement could have been directed at whomever you like: The commissioner's office. The rest of the league. Anyone who doubts Bill Belichick's brilliance. 4-0 just has a better ring to it.

As for Garoppolo, a few weeks ago we were wondering how close a call it would be between him and Brady when his contract runs out in 2017. Or would the Pats make some kind of move sooner? Would you get just a first-rounder for the kid, or a first and a player? Now we don't even know if Garoppolo will be the backup the next couple of weeks, never mind the QB of the future. If he could have played either of the last two games and didn't push through the injury, then it's hard to think of him as the true heir apparent anyway. And if the injury was simply too severe for him to play, then you wonder why the team didn't do more to let us know that. Some folks wonder if the Pats held Garoppolo out against Buffalo because they wanted to maintain his high trade value and didn't want to risk a bad game of his getting on tape -- which I suppose makes sense. But it came at the cost of a home loss to a hated division rival and a hideous offensive approach.

Yes, the future of the Pats' QB spot will be back on the table at the end of the year; the story will still be there. But a 4-0 start with Garoppolo would have given it juice all season long. Now Brady is back and the backup quarterback will become the afterthought it usually is around here. And that's all great for the team. Everything is awesome and see you in the Divisional Round.

But you have to admit: The Garoppolo thing was kind of fun while it lasted.