Pats Preseason: Offense Edition

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
114
Man, I kinda wish we'd missed the playoffs in Brady's last year here. I mean, not really, but this would've been such a great time for Bill to have been forced into doing Hard Knocks.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
Patriots picking up Kahale Warring, tight end.
43717

Warring was a former water polo player who has exceptional athleticism but was learning to play the position still. He likely is more of a receiving TE and one who could benefit from the practice squad. I liked him coming out as someone to develop because tight end is such a crapshoot. He's the longest of long shots but an interesting pick up given his athletic profile.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,538
Worcester
Patriots picking up Kahale Warring, tight end.
View attachment 43717

Warring was a former water polo player who has exceptional athleticism but was learning to play the position still. He likely is more of a receiving TE and one who could benefit from the practice squad. I liked him coming out as someone to develop because tight end is such a crapshoot. He's the longest of long shots but an interesting pick up given his athletic profile.
Can he block better than Tebow?
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
3,058
Cultural hub of the universe
Sounds like he (YC) had a tough day yesterday. From Howe at the Athletic:

"One day shouldn’t make or break his chances, but he was overwhelmed against the Giants, surrendering a sack (negated by a defensive hold in the secondary) and at least three pressures over the final 17 passing plays."
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
OL is deep and good.
Wynn, Onyenu, Andrews, Mason, Brown to start, with Karras, Herron, Cajuste looking like all but certain locks. Does Cunningham, Ferentz, or one of the other young guys make it to the 53?
Sidenote; It's kind of amazing when you look thru the weights of all the OL guys; it's pretty consistently 300-310. Then you come to Onwenu: 350 -- whoa. Then you come to Brown: 380 -- holy crap!
 

3_games_down

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2007
125
Coastal NC

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
12,355
Santa Monica, CA
I like this decision from a competitive stand point. Mac Jones still has the opportunity to outplay Cam Newton. Cam will likely cannibalize the reps with the 1's in practice today. If Cam performs poorly today and Mac does well with available reps, does Mac get the start on Sunday?
There was also a lot of chatter about how lousy the Giants defense looked yesterday. Playing Cam against their 1's today gives some perspective on Mac's performance yesterday.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
There was also a lot of chatter about how lousy the Giants defense looked yesterday. Playing Cam against their 1's today gives some perspective on Mac's performance yesterday.
Howe is "live" tweeting, Cam went 2/3 w/ a TD in 7v7, Mac went 1/2 w/ a TD.
Just started a scrimmage/simulated game, Came went 4/6 on a TD drive.

Mac struggling to start the 11 v 11:
View: https://twitter.com/MikeReiss/status/1430910283430645761


Not that this really matters, it's practice, there'll be swings in performance for both guys.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,608
Agree. It amazes me that BB continues to kiss Cam’s and vice versa.
One thing we can be sure of: BB's decision on who started in 7 on 7s has zero to do wtih kissing anyone's butt and 100% to do with what he thought would help the team win. You can imagine whatever WEEI narrative you want, but it's literally insane to question BB's approach at this point, imo.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
One thing we can be sure of: BB's decision on who started in 7 on 7s has zero to do wtih kissing anyone's butt and 100% to do with what he thought would help the team win. You can imagine whatever WEEI narrative you want, but it's literally insane to question BB's approach at this point, imo.
Also... if we're basing Mac being ready on practice/pre-season then we should probably take into account that Cam has been just as good. Mac has been really encouraging, it's a good thing, Cam is a guy they went out and got last year, and brought back this year because they've seen him in the NFL and think he could be a starter. He's going to get the tiebreaker over a guy who has never played in the league. If Jones is going to get the week 1 starting job it will be by clearly outperforming Cam by a good margin (or injury)
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
1,329
Also... if we're basing Mac being ready on practice/pre-season then we should probably take into account that Cam has been just as good. Mac has been really encouraging, it's a good thing, Cam is a guy they went out and got last year, and brought back this year because they've seen him in the NFL and think he could be a starter. He's going to get the tiebreaker over a guy who has never played in the league. If Jones is going to get the week 1 starting job it will be by clearly outperforming Cam by a good margin (or injury)
or another covid issue
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,608
Also... if we're basing Mac being ready on practice/pre-season then we should probably take into account that Cam has been just as good. Mac has been really encouraging, it's a good thing, Cam is a guy they went out and got last year, and brought back this year because they've seen him in the NFL and think he could be a starter. He's going to get the tiebreaker over a guy who has never played in the league. If Jones is going to get the week 1 starting job it will be by clearly outperforming Cam by a good margin (or injury)
Agreed. From a depth/options perspective Cam starting is the default decision absent clear reason to believe Jones gives a better chance to win. I also suspect that's the right choice for the long-term development of Jones, but that depends on a lot of things I don't know for sure (though which are true of vast majority of rookie QBs)
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,281
Jeff Howe on yesterday: Cam Newton returns and Patriots’ QB competition with Mac Jones lingers another day – The Athletic

Cam led off, but reps leaned towards Mac. And apparently the Patriots asked that he faced off against Giants starters as well.

The biggest takeaway of the day was Newton regained his spot in the leadoff role, giving off the appearance nothing has changed in the race for the No. 1 job despite Jones’ success in his absence. And even though it was circumstantial, Jones got a ton more reps than Newton, and it was clearly by design that they were all against the Giants’ starting defense. On Wednesday night, the coaching staffs discussed how they’d play their personnel and exchanged requests for the personnel they’d like to see on the other side. While it does matter who goes first, that meaning is curbed a bit when the quarterbacks are taking on the same personnel.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,281
Jeff Howe today (also, subscribe to The Athletic): Mac Jones is a rookie, but that’s not reason to keep him from being the Patriots' starting QB – The Athletic

If they believe there are enough intangible factors to rule for Newton over Jones, that’s the direction they’ll ultimately take in a couple weeks when they prepare to host the Dolphins at Gillette Stadium.

But the rookie element won’t apply. Jones has been getting to Gillette at 4:30 a.m. throughout camp and spending 16-18 hours per day at the facility. He has worn out Brian Hoyer’s phone number and McDaniels’ ear. He’s even been studying the Patriots’ defensive playbook to gain an edge in practice.

“I give him credit for that,” Dont’a Hightower said. “The kid works hard.”

Compare their training camp workloads in team drills (11-on-11s and seven-on-sevens):

Mac Jones

• 16 competitive practices (not including three walkthroughs)
• 243 of 351 (69.2 completion percentage)
• Adjusted accuracy rate (17 drops): 74.1 percent
• Six interceptions (1.7 percent of throws)

Cam Newton

• 13 competitive practices (not including three walkthroughs)
• 135 of 210 (64.3 completion percentage)
• Adjusted accuracy rate (nine drops): 68.6 percent
• Eight interceptions (3.8 percent of throws)
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
21,285
A Scud Away from Hell
I don't know, comparing stat lines from joint practices and competitive drills don't mean a lot to me. Just too many variables, no?

As much as I am hopeful & excited about Jones, I absolutely loved what I saw from Cam during the first 2 pre-season games. As Kyed & Lazar both mentioned, those appearances (especially versus the Eagles) may have been Newton's best in a Pats uniform.

The fact that Cam refuses to get vaccinated p*sses me off to no end. Other than that, I'd be happy to see him start game 1.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
12,355
Santa Monica, CA
I don't know, comparing stat lines from joint practices and competitive drills don't mean a lot to me. Just too many variables, no?

As much as I am hopeful & excited about Jones, I absolutely loved what I saw from Cam during the first 2 pre-season games. As Kyed & Lazar both mentioned, those appearances (especially versus the Eagles) may have been Newton's best in a Pats uniform.

The fact that Cam refuses to get vaccinated p*sses me off to no end. Other than that, I'd be happy to see him start game 1.
As long as teams play their backups at every position like the Eagles did, Cam will be just fine.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
1,024
Maybe we just have a kick-ass OL that even Hoyer could succeed behind.

Okay ... maybe not Hoyer
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Agreed. From a depth/options perspective Cam starting is the default decision absent clear reason to believe Jones gives a better chance to win. I also suspect that's the right choice for the long-term development of Jones, but that depends on a lot of things I don't know for sure (though which are true of vast majority of rookie QBs)
I think this may very well be Bill's line of thinking, but I disagree with it. You see it in companies all the time, if a young guy shows similar aptitude to perform the job of and older, more expensive colleague, he's the one you want in the position, even if it'll take him a while to get acclimated. I'd invert the logic to say there's no reason to start Cam unless he gives a clear indication in practice he's the one who gives you a better chance to win. If they are performing similarly and one guy will be there long term and the other won't, why postpone the process? I think the team and the coaching are more than good enough to not give Mac career-altering PTSD if he struggles early (and I'm skeptical of the whole idea of QBs being "ruined" by starting too early in general).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
I think this may very well be Bill's line of thinking, but I disagree with it. You see it in companies all the time, if a young guy shows similar aptitude to perform the job of and older, more expensive colleague, he's the one you want in the position, even if it'll take him a while to get acclimated. I'd invert the logic to say there's no reason to start Cam unless he gives a clear indication in practice he's the one who gives you a better chance to win. If they are performing similarly and one guy will be there long term and the other won't, why postpone the process? I think the team and the coaching are more than good enough to not give Mac career-altering PTSD if he struggles early (and I'm skeptical of the whole idea of QBs being "ruined" by starting too early in general).
I don't think that's a good comp, because of 2 things:
1. The NFL is an inherently short term business, you turn over a good portion of the employees every year, and each year has 1 key end deliverable, most companies can take short term reduced performance for long term because they don't measure true success by each short term project.
2. there is far less clarity on whether someone who has never done the job can do the job. Mac is a college graduate who was a summer intern doing simple tasks. You usually wouldn't fire a key employee on an important project for a no-experience college grad.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I don't think that's a good comp, because of 2 things:
1. The NFL is an inherently short term business, you turn over a good portion of the employees every year, and each year has 1 key end deliverable.
2. there is far less clarity on whether someone who has never done the job can do the job. Mac is a college graduate who was a summer intern doing simple tasks. You usually wouldn't fire a key employee on an important project for a no-experience college grad.
I don't know, are your competitors having success putting college-grad wiz kids on those positions basically every year in your scenario? Rookie QBs fail a lot too, but they start often enough to make this analogy flawed. It's already the way the market operates, Bill wouldn't be bucking any trends.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
I don't know, are your competitors having success putting college-grad wiz kids on those positions basically every year in your scenario? Rookie QBs fail a lot too, but they start often enough to make this analogy flawed. It's already the way the market operates, Bill wouldn't be bucking any trends.
Depends what we mean by competitors. If we mean potential playoff teams... no very few are, and even fewer successfully. We have discussed it a bunch, but rookie QBs by and large suck. Now you could argue maybe Bill cares more about getting Mac experience than making the playoffs, but I really doubt that based both on what we know about him and how this roster is built heavily around vets on short deals.