2020 Pats: Welcome to Camelot

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
12,466
Pittsburgh, PA
Am I the only one seeing that Stidham/Newton > Stidham/Hoyer?
No you are not. This is a depth / upside move. If Newton can play, then this helps ensure that Belichick can put an NFL starting-caliber QB on the field. Hoyer is replacement-level at best.

If it's close between them, Belichick is starting Stidham.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,116
Oregon
There's no downside.

There's potentially a huge upside.

Extrapolating anything more from the signing is a fool's errand at this point
 

Joe D Reid

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
3,313
Alameda, CA
I mean, there are three major buckets of outcomes here:

1. Cam's permanently broken or worse than Stidham and gets cut during or just after camp. Positives zero; negatives a prorated amount of the veteran minimum, or zero.

2. Cam plays badly and/or the team is bad. He starts N-1 games before being cut, traded, or benched, with N being the number of starts before his incentives really kick in. Positives: zero. Negatives: Stidham gets N-1 fewer developmental starts this year.

3. Cam is good. Positives: We are good, which is the whole point of the endeavor. Negatives: we don't start The Process for a extra year and risk that CFB will just stop cranking out good QBs despite having cranked out multiple good QBs per season for the past few years.

I think (1) is most likely, making this a nothingburger. But the move still makes sense unless you think that the marginal value of getting Stidham N-1 more starts this year materially screws up his development or the Pats' ability to evaluate him AND that there is basically no chance of (3). And they've evaluated Brady's other backups pretty well based solely on multiple years of practice.

You only get stuck in mediocrity if you eff up multiple QB picks. They might do that, because nearly everyone does that. But if there were ever a franchise that stood for the proposition that you can draft and develop an all-world QB while playing respectable football behind a solid but overpaid vet, it's the Pats.
 

SMU_Sox

loves his fluffykins
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,547
Dallas
Cam for the minimum? Sign me up. LFG! And he’s used to throwing to an underwhelming and/or young group.

Cam also adds a running element to them that they could use. If he’s not healthy and/or he can’t fit in then he’s gone. So stoked they signed him.

If they are going to a SF style offense even ran in EP having a mobile QB like Cam is a real asset.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,206
Quincy, MA
My take:

I think BB is fine with Stidham as the starter going into the season. I think he likes Hoyer as mentor/QB room presence, but realizes that if Hoyer takes the field, they have no chance to be competitive. The issue that makes the deal attractive for the Pats is that there is a tendency for young QBs to get hurt. One of Brady's greatest abilities was that he was in the lineup game after game (with two obvious exceptions). If you look at the suspension year, they ended up needing 3 QBs after Brady because the young kids couldn't stay on the field - Jacoby ended up playing without a thumb I think. BB likely thinks the team can be competitive and isn't willing to run one of the two undrafted QBs onto the field if Stidham gets knocked out for 3-4 games and Hoyer just can't do it on the field.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
1,959
Berkeley, CA
Heh.

I posted this in the free agency thread, but thought it might be a better fit here:

I thought the same of Newton before but now I'm not so sure - if he'd sign a very team-friendly deal. His career completion of 59.6% is close to Andrew Luck's 60.8% (although, to be fair, it's also close to Blake Bortles - 59.3%) and I've always liked Luck. The interesting thing to me is that Cam posted a career high completion percentage, 67.9%, in 2018 which dwarfed his previous high of 61.7 in 2013. I'm guessing McCaffrey might have been a good-sized factor in the uptick and McC's skillset plays directly into the strength of McD's current offense. Perhaps there's some room for a mid-late career renaissance - especially with the wind of the GOAT HC and a top notch OC at your back. Cam's market is shaping up nicely for the Pats too. I'm liking the idea of adding Newton a lot more than I did a few days ago (although I may still be dazed by TB's departure). More time to evaluate Stidham too.

I'll add that I'm also perfectly fine with going forward with Stidham and let it play out that way. Brave New World.
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,527
No you are not. This is a depth / upside move. If Newton can play, then this helps ensure that Belichick can put an NFL starting-caliber QB on the field. Hoyer is replacement-level at best.

If it's close between them, Belichick is starting Stidham.
According to Chris Simms' QB rankings, the Pats just added the 10th best quarterback in the NFL for league minimum salary.

For whatever that's worth.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,167
I suppose I don’t understand the logic. Cam isn’t a long term solution. Stidham probably isn’t, but now you’re likely relegating him to QB2, and you won’t find out if he’s any good or not.

And they likely are going to play themselves well out of range of Trevor Lawrence and probably Justin Fields.

As a long time fan of a team with mediocre QBs, this exactly where you don’t want to be.
Not just qb. The Fish rotted from the head down. That's a big difference between the 2 franchises.
Why do you think stidham is "relegated" to anything?
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
11,505
Bi-Coastal, for the time being
Even if Stidham were the second coming of Nathan Peterman, the Pats are never going to be anywhere near the top 5 picks in the draft so long as they have the HC and the defense they do. Top 10 even. Abhorrence for Lawrence, Bustin' for Justin, and other fun puns for top-ranked college QBs simply are not possible strategies for this team.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
25,668
Melrose, MA
There is no reason to think that being bad helps you get a franchise QB unless you are going to be top 3 bad (and even then you need to be lucky).
The other issue with tanking is that players hit free agency so fast in the NFL that, unless you have no talent on hand whatsoever, or are able to tank for just one and only one year, it can quickly get counterproductive.

If your M.O. is to let most of your top FAs walk - because they will get offers far in excess of their on field value - then an extended tank means losing talent as you are trying to add it, like running on a treadmill. Worth it if you tank for one year and land a cornerstone player, I guess. But if you don't you might be setting your franchise up for an extended period of weakness.

My brother's thoughts on Cam from a physical perspective.
So I watched Cam Newton 2018 highlights. He got hurt last year, and no idea where he's at physically now, but 2018 seems close enough to have an idea of where he'd be if he were healthy.
  • Impressed w his speed...always had a majestic stride and still does. Not as fast as he once was, but still very fast, esp for his 245-250lb frame.
  • Strength: league of his own... Sometimes guys hit him and he just goes nowhere. In frame & mobility, seems more like a move TE
  • Still ability to make some nice cuts, though you can tell they're an effort
  • Arm...nearly all the passes I saw were straight shots, with very little to no arc whatsoever, so still seems like the way to beat him is to box him in the pocket.
But if he can return to 2018 form, still a v good player.
I think health is the only question mark here, but it is a significant one.

I think Cam is here for one year on a make good deal, to rebuild value in himself, as other mid to late career FAs have dome with the Pats. The fact that he opted for this kind of deal, and the Pats offered it to him, suggests to me that healthwise he is OK - or at least that both parties think there's a good shot that he can be OK. I think if he thought was toast he would have sought a multiyear deal with some guaranteed money from a bottom feedimng team with bad management, and I doin't think the Pats would have even bothered with a cheap flier on him if they believed he was done.

Assuming there is a season at all, and that Cam is healthy, I think he starts, plays well, takes the Pats to the playoffs, and cashes in elsewhere in 2021, getting a big deal that he ultimately does not live up to. But he may ring up his best season numbers outside of the MVP year.

I don't think they are sold on Stidham as heir apparent to Brady, and so I don;t think they are overly concerned about harming Stidham's development.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,006
Nearly 93 percent of National Football League (NFL) athletes who sustained traumatic injuries to the midfoot returned to competition less than 15 months after injury and with no statistically significant decrease in performance, according to new research from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

The findings, which focus on Lisfranc injuries – characterized by fracture of the midfoot bones and/or disruption of the midfoot ligaments – between 2000-2010, were presented today at the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual conference in Las Vegas.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,049
Hingham, MA
Cam for the minimum? Sign me up. LFG! And he’s used to throwing to an underwhelming and/or young group.

Cam also adds a running element to them that they could use. If he’s not healthy and/or he can’t fit in then he’s gone. So stoked they signed him.

If they are going to a SF style offense even ran in EP having a mobile QB like Cam is a real asset.
The Pats receivers aren’t underwhelming??

But in seriousness, while I have never liked Cam, and was all aboard the Stidham train, I am intrigued. End of the day sports is entertainment and this has potential to be highly entertaining.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,006
The Pats receivers aren’t underwhelming??

But in seriousness, while I have never liked Cam, and was all aboard the Stidham train, I am intrigued. End of the day sports is entertainment and this has potential to be highly entertaining.
Cams had seasons where his best receiver was Kelvin Benjamin. Building on his short game from 2 seasons ago with James White and Julian Edelman? I think hell be solid.
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,611
Cams had seasons where his best receiver was Kelvin Benjamin. Building on his short game from 2 seasons ago with James White and Julian Edelman? I think hell be solid.
Not only that but the Pats offensive line looks to be much better than what he's had in Carolina. The Panthers haven't had a single good OT on either side of that line for the past 5 years or so.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,726
Mansfield MA
I know, just pointing out that we’ve all been trashing on the skill position talent all offseason.
To me this is a big plus with Cam versus, say, Andy Dalton. Cam has helmed offenses that were average or better with suspect receivers. Dalton's play dips a lot if he doesn't have a good supporting cast. I think both of them ended up in situations that make sense.

Three minor Cam points that are easy to miss:
1) He's a goal line weapon. 58 career rushing TDs. That's an area the Pats have struggled the last couple years, and even if they don't call Newton's number much in the red zone, defenses absolutely have to account for his legs.
2) For a running QB, he doesn't take a lot of sacks. His career sack rate is 6.8%, which is maybe just a tick below average. Compare that to say, Russell Wilson, whose career rate is 8.4% and has never had a sack rate lower than 7.0%. Usually running guys take a bunch. He figures to be better in this area than Stidham.
3) His ball security is pretty good. His INT rate is a tick below average for his career, but he really doesn't fumble much for a guy who takes as many hits as he does. Just 55 career fumbles. Eli has 66 in the same time period and he barely takes any hits. Carson Wentz has 48 career fumbles and he's only been in the league four seasons!
 

dcdrew10

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
1,248
Washington, DC via Worcester
In Stidham/Newton vs. Stidham/Hoyer debate, I also consider the playing styles and offensive packages. Stidham and Newton have a much similar physical styles than Stidham/Hoyer, so there is a lot less change in package if they switch QB mid-stream. Also, Newton might have more to contribute in mentoring Stidham.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
43,294
New York City
Hopefully Cam can throw the ball. Last year, it looked like he was throwing an anvil. The foot is secondary to the shoulder.

That said, I love this signing. Cam, if healthy, is fantastic. If he's not healthy, it will be pretty obvious. This is an awesome move, for almost nothing.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,006
Hopefully Cam can throw the ball. Last year, it looked like he was throwing an anvil. The foot is secondary to the shoulder.

That said, I love this signing. Cam, if healthy, is fantastic. If he's not healthy, it will be pretty obvious. This is an awesome move, for almost nothing.
Most of the quotes from the Panthers in the offseason last year said that his deep ball and shoulder seemed to be in great shape. Bill Barnwell highlighted that he seemed to be airing the ball deep over peoples heads during the season because he was hesitant to land on his foot, but his shoulder seemed fine. I don't remember a single snap of Newtons, so just relaying what Barnwell wrote.

In Stidham/Newton vs. Stidham/Hoyer debate, I also consider the playing styles and offensive packages. Stidham and Newton have a much similar physical styles than Stidham/Hoyer, so there is a lot less change in package if they switch QB mid-stream. Also, Newton might have more to contribute in mentoring Stidham.
Im just quoting you because you're the last person to discuss it.

With the full knowledge that teams haven't been able to give Cam a physical, IF Cam is healthy, he will be the starting QB for the Patriots this coming season. Full stop.

Both his ceiling and floor are significantly higher than Stidhams. He's proven he can run an NFL offense with: a shitty offensive line, no skill players, and poor offensive ideology. All at the same time. If his injuries are not a concern - and again, I seem to be more confident in that than the rest of the board (also IANAD, so WTF do I know) - this puts the team somewhere between borderline playoff contender to serious SB contender. I feel like the Patriots have been burned so frequently as of late with signings like this, that alot of fans are choosing to view this glass as half empty. Im more optimistic.

I was anxious for the Stidham era for the same reason as everyone else. It would be good to know what the future held at the QB position. But the only thing we Patriots fans were hanging onto as a barometer of Stidhams success was the vote of confidence that BB was giving him as the starter. We can pretend this signing doesnt change that, but it does. Because if Cam is healthy, he will be tabbed as the starter for this team. Its why Cam signed here, and its why BB signed him.

And the upside he provides makes it so worth it.

SB or bust, baby!
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,050
CT
Hopefully Cam can throw the ball. Last year, it looked like he was throwing an anvil. The foot is secondary to the shoulder.

That said, I love this signing. Cam, if healthy, is fantastic. If he's not healthy, it will be pretty obvious. This is an awesome move, for almost nothing.
From what I can recall, people were saying in training camp the zip on his throws was back and he was pushing the ball down field. Then he had the foot injury and clearly wasn’t fully planting his foot and was sailing all of his throws.

He should be almost two years removed from the shoulder injury and had almost a full season off last year. It’s as good as its ever going to be. I suppose I would be a little more nervous that the foot injury takes away some of his running ability.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,397
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Fast forward to mid-season when Belichick trades his backup QB, a semi-healthy Newton, to a contender who's just lost their starting QB for the season, for a conditional 2nd rounder, hearken back to this run on sentence for an I told you so.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
8,871
Or he plays well and they keep him all season and they get a compensatory third round pick (to make up for the loss of their actual third).
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
884
I was anxious for the Stidham era for the same reason as everyone else. It would be good to know what the future held at the QB position.
I get the point that's being made here about opportunity cost as it relates to Stidham. But for most franchises, what the future holds at the QB position is... mediocre QB play. Whatever a team can do to hedge on that purgatory is worth doing, if it's affordable. There seems to be a heighted expectation in this thread that starting Stidham this year would yield a tidy binary outcome, where either he's great and the QB position is solved for the next decade, or he's terrible and the team cuts bait and drafts someone new. What's much more likely is that he flashes some skills, shows some weaknesses... and then we spend the next several seasons watching him address some of those weaknesses but fail to address others and basically evolve into another adequate-but-not-great QB. It's not a knock on Stidham, it's just what generally happens.

It's so hard to find elite QB play that anything you can do to possibly steal a year of it— at a discount, no less— is worth a shot, IMO.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
28,703
AZ
Most of the quotes from the Panthers in the offseason last year said that his deep ball and shoulder seemed to be in great shape. Bill Barnwell highlighted that he seemed to be airing the ball deep over peoples heads during the season because he was hesitant to land on his foot, but his shoulder seemed fine. I don't remember a single snap of Newtons, so just relaying what Barnwell wrote.



Im just quoting you because you're the last person to discuss it.

With the full knowledge that teams haven't been able to give Cam a physical, IF Cam is healthy, he will be the starting QB for the Patriots this coming season. Full stop.

Both his ceiling and floor are significantly higher than Stidhams. He's proven he can run an NFL offense with: a shitty offensive line, no skill players, and poor offensive ideology. All at the same time. If his injuries are not a concern - and again, I seem to be more confident in that than the rest of the board (also IANAD, so WTF do I know) - this puts the team somewhere between borderline playoff contender to serious SB contender. I feel like the Patriots have been burned so frequently as of late with signings like this, that alot of fans are choosing to view this glass as half empty. Im more optimistic.

I was anxious for the Stidham era for the same reason as everyone else. It would be good to know what the future held at the QB position. But the only thing we Patriots fans were hanging onto as a barometer of Stidhams success was the vote of confidence that BB was giving him as the starter. We can pretend this signing doesnt change that, but it does. Because if Cam is healthy, he will be tabbed as the starter for this team. Its why Cam signed here, and its why BB signed him.

And the upside he provides makes it so worth it.

SB or bust, baby!
And the part that is getting lost is that Bill pulled this off with $680,000 in cap space and without making any other moves. If Cam is great it sounds like it will cost up to $7.5 million in cap space but deferred to next year because it is NLTBE. We have the room next year. This was an incredible coup. People are in denial about the Patriots’ cap situation.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,049
Hingham, MA
I get the point that's being made here about opportunity cost as it relates to Stidham. But for most franchises, what the future holds at the QB position is... mediocre QB play. Whatever a team can do to hedge on that purgatory is worth doing, if it's affordable. There seems to be a heighted expectation in this thread that starting Stidham this year would yield a tidy binary outcome, where either he's great and the QB position is solved for the next decade, or he's terrible and the team cuts bait and drafts someone new. What's much more likely is that he flashes some skills, shows some weaknesses... and then we spend the next several seasons watching him address some of those weaknesses but fail to address others and basically evolve into another adequate-but-not-great QB. It's not a knock on Stidham, it's just what generally happens.

It's so hard to find elite QB play that anything you can do to possibly steal a year of it— at a discount, no less— is worth a shot, IMO.
Yeah some examples that come to mind are actually first round picks - guys like Tannehill, Mariota, and Winston. Guys that were all taken in the top 10, and yet they all got through their first contracts without anyone really knowing if they were good or not. Hell I STILL don't know if Tannehill is good!
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
988
Wildly optimistic take, but the cap situation for '21 and beyond is such that if this works out (health + skill + likes it here) there's really no reason an extension is completely out of the question. Certainly not the most likely scenario, but is that really any less likely than coming out of this year convinced you have the guy in Stidham? No matter how you slice it, the team's chances of good QB play for this year have increased significantly with this move, and I'd argue it gives a similar bump to the chances of good QB play for the next few years.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,049
Hingham, MA
Wildly optimistic take, but the cap situation for '21 and beyond is such that if this works out (health + skill + likes it here) there's really no reason an extension is completely out of the question. Certainly not the most likely scenario, but is that really any less likely than coming out of this year convinced you have the guy in Stidham? No matter how you slice it, the team's chances of good QB play for this year have increased significantly with this move, and I'd argue it gives a similar bump to the chances of good QB play for the next few years.
If Cam has a great year, he'll be looking for $30M+ annually on the open market. I guess I could see the Pats giving him a decent deal, but the more likely scenario is he signs somewhere else.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,006
Yeah some examples that come to mind are actually first round picks - guys like Tannehill, Mariota, and Winston. Guys that were all taken in the top 10, and yet they all got through their first contracts without anyone really knowing if they were good or not. Hell I STILL don't know if Tannehill is good!
This is exactly it. If Stidham went 9-7 and showed promise, it doesnt really mean anything for 3 years down the line.

Josh Allen
Sam Darnold
Baker Mayfield
Ryan Tannehill
Jacoby Brisett
Derek Carr
Marcus Marriota
Daniel Jones
Carson Wentz
Nick Foles
Mitch Trubisky
Kirk Cousins
Teddy Bridgewater
Jarred Goff
Jameis Winston

I mean, the list goes on and on. At one point in time, each one of these guys were considered potentially the longterm future at QB for a franchise. Some might still be. But even if Stidham performs above average this season, theres nothing to say that he is still the answer at QB in 2 or 3 years. Most teams don't get a Tom Brady or Drew Brees for 15 years.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,726
Mansfield MA
If Cam has a great year, he'll be looking for $30M+ annually on the open market. I guess I could see the Pats giving him a decent deal, but the more likely scenario is he signs somewhere else.
Franchise tag is an option, with the Pats projected to have a ton of 2021 space. Franchise-and-trade not out of the question, either.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
11,099
Soden is a bum. He should be ignored and considered a troll. He's never been anything but a troll. Maybe 2020 is Miami's year, though.
I was watching the 28-3 game and following along with the SoSH game thread. He popped in a few times to say things like “Maybe Next Year.” It was divine.

Of course the Dolphins haven’t even had a “maybe next year” since 1998.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
28,703
AZ
The apy for a third round comp pick this year ended up being around $15m and will probably not be higher next year. So if the Patriots keep him for the year they should if nothing else get a decent comp pick.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Fast forward to mid-season when Belichick trades his backup QB, a semi-healthy Newton, to a contender who's just lost their starting QB for the season, for a conditional 2nd rounder, hearken back to this run on sentence for an I told you so.
No. It will be for a 3rd round near the beginning of the round and Goodell will rule that THIS is the draft choice that the Pats lose for StupidFilmGate
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
2,214
In the simulacrum
I just don’t see how anyone could be especially bothered by this. There seems to be no major downside and the Patriots have shown a remarkable ability to change their offensive approach to adjust to both the strengths of their personnel and league wide patterns. I think the sky is the limit on the upside and I look forward to BB and McDaniels maybe reinventing their approach to the offense in ways that surprise the league (and this board). And if he gets cut, well, easy come easy go. This is totally a “in Bill we trust move.”
 
Last edited:

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,123
New York City
I don't think they are sold on Stidham as heir apparent to Brady, and so I don;t think they are overly concerned about harming Stidham's development.
Even if they did think Stidham is clearly their franchise QB going forward, is there any actual evidence that him serving as a backup for one more year would harm his development (not saying EJ is suggesting this)? In the absolute best-case scenario, Cam returns to something approximating his former glory and Stidham gets to learn from another former MVP QB (one that, as others have pointed out, is probably closer to Stidham's style than Brady was) before taking the reigns next year. Sure, that would mean his in-game experience would be relatively limited, but another year of NFL seasoning even on the practice field/in the locker room before being the team leader is not nothing.

And as many others have already pointed out there is virtually no downside here and even the worst-case scenario is beneficial to the Pats: Stidham gets to get a few pointers from a former MVP during training camp, Cam is sent on his way before the regular season begins, and the Patriots get some marginal PR benefits from the signing (just taking a quick glance around Twitter makes obvious, if it wasn't already, that Newton is hugely respected by other NFL players and that it's perceived that the Pats did him a solid by signing him).
 

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
5,587
Texas/Montana
Look...if nothing else he gets our defense prepared for running mobile quarterbacks like Jackson, Tua and Mahomes. I have a feeling this is going to work out great. I think he will beat out Stidham in the preseason but I think Stidham will get plenty of snaps during the regular season.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
25,668
Melrose, MA
Even if they did think Stidham is clearly their franchise QB going forward, is there any actual evidence that him serving as a backup for one more year would harm his development (not saying EJ is suggesting this)? In the absolute best-case scenario, Cam returns to something approximating his former glory and Stidham gets to learn from another former MVP QB (one that, as others have pointed out, is probably closer to Stidham's style than Brady was) before taking the reigns next year. Sure, that would mean his in-game experience would be relatively limited, but another year of NFL seasoning even on the practice field/in the locker room before being the team leader is not nothing.
I agree with this point.
 

Nator

Member
SoSH Member
They signed a 32 year old former MVP QB who can potentially be a gigantic mobile play-maker when protection breaks down with an absolute artillery piece for an arm. They did with with only 6 figures worth of cap space. The very worst case scenario is an Albert Haynesworth type exit.


Also, rookie QBs are a crapshoot, the idea that tanking (they won't get to 1) to get higher in the first is worth it is dubious when there might not be a single QB drafted next year who is as good as Cam Newton.


2017- Trubisky (2), Mahomes (10), Watson (12)
QFT, with extreme prejudice.

Just seeing this in print makes me want to vomit. I can't imagine the sports induced trauma this causes Bears fans.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,390
The Pats are essentially buying a 3rd round comp pick, with a chance they cut him and get nothing and a chance that they get not only that pick, but pretty good QB play. That's a gamble worth taking in late June.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,527
They signed a 32 year old former MVP QB who can potentially be a gigantic mobile play-maker when protection breaks down with an absolute artillery piece for an arm. They did with with only 6 figures worth of cap space. The very worst case scenario is an Albert Haynesworth type exit.



QFT, with extreme prejudice.

Just seeing this in print makes me want to vomit. I can't imagine the sports induced trauma this causes Bears fans.
Mahomes with the 10th pick of the draft is going to go down as one of the greatest draft picks in NFL history.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,167
It seems that every negative scenario requires as a starting point that the Patriots have a Bengals or Jets-level front office and coaching staff.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
988
It seems that every negative scenario requires as a starting point that the Patriots have a Bengals or Jets-level front office and coaching staff.
Yup. And coming at it from the other angle, while those Panthers teams had a good coaching staff, who isn't at least a little bit fascinated by what Cam will look like under BB and JM?
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,383
The Pats are essentially buying a 3rd round comp pick, with a chance they cut him and get nothing and a chance that they get not only that pick, but pretty good QB play. That's a gamble worth taking in late June.
Especially for how much they are paying him. If he stinks or is a problem in the locker room, Bill will cut him and roll with Stidham and we're back to where we were a week ago, hoping and praying the kid has what it takes. As OFC said above, one more year on the bench isn't the end of the world for Stidham.

This is such a BB move. Potentially above average veteran for low money. If he comes back strong, the team has options to recoup even more value from him. I'm excited to see what kind of offense McD rolls out for him.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
27,790
They signed a 32 year old former MVP QB who can potentially be a gigantic mobile play-maker when protection breaks down with an absolute artillery piece for an arm. They did with with only 6 figures worth of cap space. The very worst case scenario is an Albert Haynesworth type exit.



QFT, with extreme prejudice.

Just seeing this in print makes me want to vomit. I can't imagine the sports induced trauma this causes Bears fans.
He's 31.