2020 Pats: QB Situation Beyond Cam

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Adjusted net yards per attempt aggregates a lot of the individual metrics. Incompletions have zero yards; interceptions and sacks are deducted based on average yards lost for each. It ignores TD%, which can be very teammate dependent. If posters want to ignore that metric, they should at least give a reason why.
1) It ignores positive running plays by QBs while punishing them for sacks that could be attributed to designed runs. The argument wasn’t just about top 10 passing QB and in today’s game you can’t ignore that aspect of the position.
2) According to that metric, Watson is the 4th best QB in the history of the NFL. Given his running ability, it’s potentially undervaluing him too.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
Adjusted net yards per attempt aggregates a lot of the individual metrics. Incompletions have zero yards; interceptions and sacks are deducted based on average yards lost for each. It ignores TD%, which can be very teammate dependent. If posters want to ignore that metric, they should at least give a reason why.
To be clear: ANY/A does not ignore TD%. TD% and INT% are factored into the "A" part.

1) It ignores positive running plays by QBs while punishing them for sacks that could be attributed to designed runs. The argument wasn’t just about top 10 passing QB and in today’s game you can’t ignore that aspect of the position.
It's fair to note running ability isn't captured in ANY/A (or most passing stats), but designed runs aren't going to be mistaken for sacks very often.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,212
1) It ignores positive running plays by QBs while punishing them for sacks that could be attributed to designed runs. The argument wasn’t just about top 10 passing QB and in today’s game you can’t ignore that aspect of the position.
2) According to that metric, Watson is the 4th best QB in the history of the NFL. Given his running ability, it’s potentially undervaluing him too.
Who are the running QB's that you feel had better seasons that Brady in 2018? It's a strange argument to make in an attempt to devalue Brady's contributions, but I'm curious.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Who are the running QB's that you feel had better seasons that Brady in 2018? It's a strange argument to make in an attempt to devalue Brady's contributions, but I'm curious.
I don’t have time today to pull all their individual rushing stats but just looking at the running component of QBR, Brady was 18th.

Overall in 2018, Mahomes, Rivers, Brees, Wilson, Luck, Goff, and Watson were all probably better than Brady. Then you get into a mix of Brady/Rodgers/Ryan/Ben/Cousins which puts Brady anywhere in that 8-12 range.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,212
I don’t have time today to pull all their individual rushing stats but just looking at the running component of QBR, Brady was 18th.

Overall in 2018, Mahomes, Rivers, Brees, Wilson, Luck, Goff, and Watson were all probably better than Brady. Then you get into a mix of Brady/Rodgers/Ryan/Ben/Cousins which puts Brady anywhere in that 8-12 range.
Watson was recovering from ACL surgery in 2018 and did not have a better year than Brady, no matter what metric is used. Kirk Cousins being in the same league as Brady is laughable. Brady outplayed Rodgers by a wide margin in their one matchup and statistically had a better season across the board. Goff and Brady were much closer statistically in nearly all measures, and Goff's 2.7 yards per carry aren't exactly indicative of some large number of designed runs being missed by the stats.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,488
Santa Monica, CA
Brady outplaying Rodgers in one game carries no weight at all to me. He also outplayed Mahomes in one game, was he better than Mahomes in 2018?

Rodgers passed for more yards than Brady that year and threw 25 TD passes with 2 interceptions. Brady threw five times as many picks as Rodgers, so I'm having a hard time seeing a wide gap in favor of Brady overall.
 
Last edited:

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
Brady outplaying Rodgers in one game carries no weight at all to me. He also outplayed Mahomes in one game, was he better than Mahomes in 2018?

Rodgers passed for more yards than Brady that year and threw 25 TD passes with 2 interceptions. Brady threw five times as many picks as Rodgers, so I'm having a hard time seeing a wide gap in favor of Brady overall.
The Packers had a very pedestrian offense in 2018, finishing in a tie for 14th in points scored despite an running game that averaged 5.0 yards per carry. Despite the gaudy INT rate, Rodgers was not particularly efficient that year, which is a big reason they only won six games.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,100
Has Stidham sucked?

He's barely had a chance.
Why are we dismissing the fact that BB sees him every single day in practice? He sees him throw a hundred passes a week, every week. He sees him run and offense and he sees how he breaks down defenses.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,374
Why are we dismissing the fact that BB sees him every single day in practice? He sees him throw a hundred passes a week, every week. He sees him run and offense and he sees how he breaks down defenses.
He has also seen Cam every single day in practice (I understand that he still needs to choose one of the two on game day) but one of the two could possibly benefit from real game experiences that could potentially improve their practice form
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,768
He has also seen Cam every single day in practice (I understand that he still needs to choose one of the two on game day) but one of the two could possibly benefit from real game experiences that could potentially improve their practice form
See this is just dumb. If you can't play in practice you aren't going to get better in a game. It usually just means you aren't good enough.

The problem with the entire premise of "well play Stidham maybe he'll suddenly get good" is... it's based on nothing but blind hope.

it's far more likely that Cam Newton, at one time an elite QB, and for a long time at least a mediocre NFL starter will regain his form than that a low drafted guy who wasn't a particularly well regarded prospect, and couldn't beat out Brian Hoyer will suddenly improve because he played in a game when he's not improving in practice.

Neither is likely, but Cam has had flashes at least to make one think he could be okay.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,563
Why are we dismissing the fact that BB sees him every single day in practice? He sees him throw a hundred passes a week, every week. He sees him run and offense and he sees how he breaks down defenses.
Not dismissing it as much as we are seeing Cam not perform week in and week out.

We have seen Stidham come in and throw a better ball than him in small chunks. Is it that insane of an idea to see what he has in a real game? You can practice a million times and it not having the same effect as game play. As a fan of the NEP, I'd be curious to see what we have in him and not be left to wonder while we watch a QB play as poorly as I've ever seen in the uniform.

The reports from Training Camp pre-Cam were all hugely positive about Stid.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,768
Not dismissing it as much as we are seeing Cam not perform week in and week out.

We have seen Stidham come in and throw a better ball than him in small chunks. Is it that insane of an idea to see what he has in a real game? You can practice a million times and it not having the same effect as game play. As a fan of the NEP, I'd be curious to see what we have in him and not be left to wonder while we watch a QB play as poorly as I've ever seen in the uniform.

The reports from Training Camp pre-Cam were all hugely positive about Stid.
The reports said that Hoyer was the likely starter, that is the opposite of hugely positive. If you mean his teammates pumping him up... that happens all the time, I mean we could sign Christian Hackenberg and McCourty would tell the press about the great practices he's having.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,374
See this is just dumb. If you can't play in practice you aren't going to get better in a game. It usually just means you aren't good enough..
I respect that you disagree, but that does not make the idea "dumb", especially following it up with "usually".
Recently there has been some talking head speculation that Carson Wentz has a decent chance to be the next Pats QB NESN , NBC , and others (I know covered already in this thread). I'm curious that no one really mentions Jacoby Brissett as an option to compete
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,100
Not dismissing it as much as we are seeing Cam not perform week in and week out.

We have seen Stidham come in and throw a better ball than him in small chunks. Is it that insane of an idea to see what he has in a real game? You can practice a million times and it not having the same effect as game play. As a fan of the NEP, I'd be curious to see what we have in him and not be left to wonder while we watch a QB play as poorly as I've ever seen in the uniform.
I hate to say this, but I trust BB has considered that.

And man, I envy you if this is the worst you've ever seen a Pats QB play... :)
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,563
The reports said that Hoyer was the likely starter, that is the opposite of hugely positive. If you mean his teammates pumping him up... that happens all the time, I mean we could sign Christian Hackenberg and McCourty would tell the press about the great practices he's having.
That’s not the pre-season I remember. It was always Stidham until Cam.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,563
I hate to say this, but I trust BB has considered that.

And man, I envy you if this is the worst you've ever seen a Pats QB play... :)
Yeah. Super Bowl 97 was my first real Pats game that I ever watched. My dad was always a fan but I didn’t care about football much. Then I was a passive fan until The snow bowl which I also watched with my dad (I was in the 10th grade then).
Very spoiled. My Sox fandom goes back to birth.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,768
That’s not the pre-season I remember. It was always Stidham until Cam.
https://985thesportshub.com/2020/04/17/ian-rapoport-thinks-brian-hoyer-will-be-patriots-starter-in-2020/https://www.masslive.com/patriots/2020/05/brian-hoyer-not-jarrett-stidham-will-be-patriots-week-1-starter-says-rob-ninkovich.htmlRappaport and Ninkovich both were saying they thought Hoyer would be the starter based on what they were hearing

https://www.clnsmedia.com/patriots-roster-reset-what-will-the-offense-looks-like-with-jarrett-stidham-at-quarterback/https://nesn.com/podcast/patriots-qb-battle-jarrett-stidham-or-brian-hoyer-nesn-patriots-podcast-ep-177/Lazar and Kyed were saying that they thought it was a close battle and that Stidham "should" win it, but most of their analysis was more "we know Hoyer is bad" than "Stidham sounds like the starter"

The threads on here were loaded with "Stidham QB1" stuff but it was as always more about preferring the option that in undefined and could be anything over the option you know isn't very good, than it was on any real indications that Stidham was the expected starter.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,563
https://985thesportshub.com/2020/04/17/ian-rapoport-thinks-brian-hoyer-will-be-patriots-starter-in-2020/https://www.masslive.com/patriots/2020/05/brian-hoyer-not-jarrett-stidham-will-be-patriots-week-1-starter-says-rob-ninkovich.htmlRappaport and Ninkovich both were saying they thought Hoyer would be the starter based on what they were hearing

https://www.clnsmedia.com/patriots-roster-reset-what-will-the-offense-looks-like-with-jarrett-stidham-at-quarterback/https://nesn.com/podcast/patriots-qb-battle-jarrett-stidham-or-brian-hoyer-nesn-patriots-podcast-ep-177/Lazar and Kyed were saying that they thought it was a close battle and that Stidham "should" win it, but most of their analysis was more "we know Hoyer is bad" than "Stidham sounds like the starter"

The threads on here were loaded with "Stidham QB1" stuff but it was as always more about preferring the option that in undefined and could be anything over the option you know isn't very good, than it was on any real indications that Stidham was the expected starter.
Weird. I remember so many YouTube breakdowns of his pre-season and last season and stuff.

At the very least, it was mixed and he was definitely up for consideration. And when Cam was signed, the general feeling wasn't that Hoyer was being replaced, but Stid was.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,768
Weird. I remember so many YouTube breakdowns of his pre-season and last season and stuff.

At the very least, it was mixed and he was definitely up for consideration. And when Cam was signed, the general feeling wasn't that Hoyer was being replaced, but Stid was.
I think that's because everyone knew Hoyer wasn't an NFL starter, so the assumption was... "well Stidham must be the starter" when the answer really was "neither of these guys can start, so it's either sign someone or flip a coin between two guys who you know can't do it".

That was kind of my overall point, that Stidham really didn't pull away from Hoyer before Cam, and that's indicative of what the staff felt and how he was performing. And if that has continued to be the case in the film room and on the practice field, there isn't a real upside to playing him, he's what they thought he was... a borderline rosterable QB 2/3 who hasn't got NFL starter caliber performance in him.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,923
Unreal America
I hate to say this, but I trust BB has considered that.

And man, I envy you if this is the worst you've ever seen a Pats QB play... :)
Cam looks like Dan Marino compared to the gaggle of incompetents we trotted out at QB from 1987 to 1992.
 

bigq

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,186
Cam looks like Dan Marino compared to the gaggle of incompetents we trotted out at QB from 1987 to 1992.
Flutie weeps. And he was a true Superman with an 8-5 record during the six year period (he was on the team for just three of those) given the ineptitude of the team around him.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,106
Newton
I hate how the NFL wasted Doug Flutie.

Except Bill Belichick. He knew that he was the football version of Steph Curry (or maybe Dana Barros).
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,923
Unreal America
Flutie weeps. And he was a true Superman with an 8-5 record during the six year period (he was on the team for just three of those) given the ineptitude of the team around him.
I loved Doug Flutie. I was a huge BC fan when I was a kid, and I was psyched when he ended up on the Pats. But in retrospect, his W/L record seemed to be somewhat of a fluke.

Was just looking at his 1988 game logs. In the 9 game stretch where he started and went 6-3, he had *six* games where he completed less than 10 passes. He only had 4 games with above a 50% completion rate. Four of the six wins came with scoring 21 or less points. Even his rushing stats were fairly pedestrian: only 1 game with more than 30 yards, no rushing TDs as a starter.

The run game, and D, really carried him. Granted he hit on the occasional big play, and one can definitely argue that 1980s NFL coaches had zero clue how to best utilize a QB like Flutie.

I stand by my point that Cam, right now, is better than anyone who played QB from 87-92.
 

bigq

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,186
I loved Doug Flutie. I was a huge BC fan when I was a kid, and I was psyched when he ended up on the Pats. But in retrospect, his W/L record seemed to be somewhat of a fluke.

Was just looking at his 1988 game logs. In the 9 game stretch where he started and went 6-3, he had *six* games where he completed less than 10 passes. He only had 4 games with above a 50% completion rate. Four of the six wins came with scoring 21 or less points. Even his rushing stats were fairly pedestrian: only 1 game with more than 30 yards, no rushing TDs as a starter.

The run game, and D, really carried him. Granted he hit on the occasional big play, and one can definitely argue that 1980s NFL coaches had zero clue how to best utilize a QB like Flutie.

I stand by my point that Cam, right now, is better than anyone who played QB from 87-92.
Okay good points and that’s all well and good but who would you trust with the game on the line needing just a successful drop kick to ice a close game? Point Flutie.
 

Beomoose

is insoxicated
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
21,454
Exiled
It will be head coaching malpractice to start Cam again this season.
Is this a call for Hoyer? Because the first time some defender breathes on Stiddy there will be be much wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding the potential to lose our future QB to injury in garbage time.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,971
NH
tbh Stidham should probably just be cut. If he can't find snaps on this team, what's the thought process that there will ever be a time he'd be useful?
 

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
11,257
San Francisco
I kind of hope Cam retires. He is still young and pretty healthy. He would be great on TV. Also, (selfishly) it would prevent BB from starting him again next year.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
7,010
Pasadena, CA
They are waiting for Stidham to step up and win the job in practice and it's apparent that he simply has not done that. "There is no such thing as a game day player" - Ernie Adams.
That‘s great and all, but then I think about all the stupid challenges they’ve made over the years, presumably on Adams’ input. Maybe he can be wrong once in a while.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,621
CT
I kind of hope Cam retires. He is still young and pretty healthy. He would be great on TV. Also, (selfishly) it would prevent BB from starting him again next year.
I’m not an expert on throwing mechanics, and Cam has always has a funky delivery, but his shoulder looks absolutely cooked to me. Like he can’t even raise it to throw at certain angles, he’s moving his entire body to compensate.

The one hopper on a like 15 yard comeback route tells me he’s expecting some juice to be there, but when he reaches back and throws it, it just absolutely isn’t there.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,853
Every NFL team gives a vast majority of their practice snaps to the starter. How exactly is Stidham supposed to win the job in practice when he's not getting many if any reps? His time to step up and win the job was in the preseason.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,712
Well now that the team has been eliminated, I really hope BB gives Stidham the last two games. Literally nothing to lose (at this point, losing games only "helps"). I get you keep playing to win at all costs while you still have a chance to make the playoffs, but now that that's officially over, it ought to be time for Stidham. Especially if they don't think Cam really is the guy for the team next year. Which, god, I hope they've determined is the case.

I still think Cam can be a really good NFL backup. He can provide some unique things off the bench, and there are definitely worse backups in the NFL. If he's willing to be that guy, there's still a place for him I think.

As for the "there's no such thing as a game day player", we know that's not always true. Allen Iverson hated practice and didn't even give it a try, but come game time, man, electric. The NFL is littered with players who don't even participate in a fair number of practices (to take care of their bodies maybe) but play really well during games.

Maybe he just SUCKS in practice and shows absolutely NOTHING. But if that's so, honestly, he shouldn't even be on an NFL roster. That they're keeping him on board says they haven't totally given up on him. It's night and day playing in practice and playing in games. It's entirely possible that Stidham is better in games than in practice. We will never know unless, you know, he gets a chance to play.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,885
ct
Well now that the team has been eliminated, I really hope BB gives Stidham the last two games. Literally nothing to lose (at this point, losing games only "helps"). I get you keep playing to win at all costs while you still have a chance to make the playoffs, but now that that's officially over, it ought to be time for Stidham. Especially if they don't think Cam really is the guy for the team next year. Which, god, I hope they've determined is the case.

I still think Cam can be a really good NFL backup. He can provide some unique things off the bench, and there are definitely worse backups in the NFL. If he's willing to be that guy, there's still a place for him I think.

As for the "there's no such thing as a game day player", we know that's not always true. Allen Iverson hated practice and didn't even give it a try, but come game time, man, electric. The NFL is littered with players who don't even participate in a fair number of practices (to take care of their bodies maybe) but play really well during games.

Maybe he just SUCKS in practice and shows absolutely NOTHING. But if that's so, honestly, he shouldn't even be on an NFL roster. That they're keeping him on board says they haven't totally given up on him. It's night and day playing in practice and playing in games. It's entirely possible that Stidham is better in games than in practice. We will never know unless, you know, he gets a chance to play.
I mean in the few games that Stidham has played I thought he has looked decent. Throw out his first ever appearance against the Jets. Jarrett was decent against the Chiefs, 49ers, and Chargers albeit in garbage time. For all the folks saying Stidham must suck in practice, the back up gets much less than 100 snaps, probably more like 20 snaps. You gotta remember that there are very few actual practices due to changes in the CBA. Most practices are more like walk throughs than padded practices. So for those of you saying that Stidham has a legitimate chance to be the starter based on his practice efforts, have no clue .
Hopefully with the Pats eliminated, Stidham gets a legitimate opportunity to play.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,212
Well now that the team has been eliminated, I really hope BB gives Stidham the last two games. Literally nothing to lose (at this point, losing games only "helps"). I get you keep playing to win at all costs while you still have a chance to make the playoffs, but now that that's officially over, it ought to be time for Stidham. Especially if they don't think Cam really is the guy for the team next year. Which, god, I hope they've determined is the case.

I still think Cam can be a really good NFL backup. He can provide some unique things off the bench, and there are definitely worse backups in the NFL. If he's willing to be that guy, there's still a place for him I think.

As for the "there's no such thing as a game day player", we know that's not always true. Allen Iverson hated practice and didn't even give it a try, but come game time, man, electric. The NFL is littered with players who don't even participate in a fair number of practices (to take care of their bodies maybe) but play really well during games.

Maybe he just SUCKS in practice and shows absolutely NOTHING. But if that's so, honestly, he shouldn't even be on an NFL roster. That they're keeping him on board says they haven't totally given up on him. It's night and day playing in practice and playing in games. It's entirely possible that Stidham is better in games than in practice. We will never know unless, you know, he gets a chance to play.
The bolded is so completely in opposition to Belichick's coaching philosophy that you'll be waiting a long time. Allen Iverson did not play in the NFL and is not at all a relevant comparison. Established veterans can get away with missing practices here and there, but I'm not aware of a single NFL player that takes off practices but plays on a regular basis. The NFL is not the NBA; not even close.
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
14,116
Boulder, CO
I’m not an expert on throwing mechanics, and Cam has always has a funky delivery, but his shoulder looks absolutely cooked to me. Like he can’t even raise it to throw at certain angles, he’s moving his entire body to compensate.

The one hopper on a like 15 yard comeback route tells me he’s expecting some juice to be there, but when he reaches back and throws it, it just absolutely isn’t there.
Ive been saying this all season. His shoulder is nuked. He has no idea where his release point is and doesn’t trust his arm strength so his full body is getting into even medium range throws. I don’t think he comes back to anything close to what he once was. It’s a shame.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,342
I mean in the few games that Stidham has played I thought he has looked decent. Throw out his first ever appearance against the Jets. Jarrett was decent against the Chiefs, 49ers, and Chargers albeit in garbage time.
18/33 212 yards 2 tds 3 picks and a 56.6 rating mostly against backups is far worse than Cam has been this year
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,853
His numbers coming into shitty situations are nearly pointless to judge. Until he gets first-team reps all week in practice and starts the game the book is still out. Eye test-wise he looks pretty decent. Throws a nice ball, doesn't stand like a statue waiting decades to make decisions. I don't think he's a franchise guy, but I do think he's better than Cam- who has gotten an inordinate amount of rope because of his vet/leader status and because he kept the Pats in some close games versus good teams early in the year. I'll be shocked and disappointed if BB doesn't give him the last two weeks as a tryout.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,212
I'm perfectly OK with Belichick giving Newton the playing time if he thought Cam gave them the best chance to win each week while they were still in the playoff hunt. Maybe his assessments of Newton and Stidham are incorrect; all coaches make mistakes from time to time. But playing to win is the right move when your playoff hopes are alive. This season was always going to be a bridge year no matter what; there was literally nothing Bill the GM could do to prevent it.

Now that the playoffs out the window, it cannot hurt for Belichick to guarantee Cam's snap count bonuses give Stidham the reins for the final 2 games. Besides, losing to the Jets would not be the worst outcome if sends Trevor to Jacksonville.