Pats Re-sign Cam Newton to a 1-Year Deal

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,150
around the way
For the folks hard-core against this deal, is Belichick an idiot now? Or is this a 98.5 "Kraft is cheap" take? I'm legit curious about the angle here.

Edit: if you just want to vent because you had your hopes up for Watson megadeal or a huge trade up into the top 3, that's fine too. I'm just trying to understand.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,676
I really hope those two wins over Baltimore and Arizona were worth it because 5-11 to me would look a hell of a lot better right now than 7-9 and the 15th pick.
It's why I was rooting heavily for L's once it became apparent what this team's ceiling was. 2 additional L's and this team is picking #8 instead of #15 and right in Lance, Pitts, Parsons land without needing to sacrifice any additional capital. They'd also be within shouting distance of Fields as well. Oh well.
 

Beomoose

Member
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
18,435
Wherabouts Unknown
Sign FAs who like Cam and play well with a highly mobile QB, then trade up to pick Lance. End of next season we could have an offense humming along all ready for Trey to step into the starter's shoes.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,364
The idea that there are people who would rather have Mariota at a bunch more money and whatever you trade for him is WILD to me
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,445
Right Here
Let’s not forget that Cam had Covid, no off-season work with the team, and no real skill players around him. Hell people were ready to sign him to a 4 year deal before he got sick. Draft a kid in the 2nd round, have him learn as the backup, and take over in 2022.

I like that option better than giving San Francisco a pick to pay Jimmy G to miss 8/9 games.

This is exactly where i am with this. There was a lot that could go better this year and, barring an injury, couldn't get much worse. The other thing to bear in mind is that this pretty much assures me that there isn't a QB out there that could be had for what Bill was willing to give up despite being loaded with picks and loaded with cap dollars.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see them trade up on Draft Day, draft Mac Jones, and let Jones back up Cam for a year.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
2,482
For the folks hard-core against this deal, is Belichick an idiot now? Or is this a 98.5 "Kraft is cheap" take? I'm legit curious about the angle here.

Edit: if you just want to vent because you had your hopes up for Watson megadeal or a huge trade up into the top 3, that's fine too. I'm just trying to understand.
My season ticket-holder friend who doesn't know subtlety: "Bill is an arrogant ass and the Krafts are cheap." So it appears his answer is all of the above.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
44,227
I'm not upset with the re-signing, but I'm not sure how useful completion percent is anymore as a stat to differentiate performance. Cam was within half a point of the guys you mentioned.

This past season 32 of the 35 QBs who qualified had a comp rate greater than 60%. 20 years ago just 13 of 34 had a comp rate of 60%+. The game is so different now, a QB basically has to be historically awful to not at least be in the low/mid 60s.
Okay--and he was still better than a lot of bigger names.

And then there's this:

Doug Kyed on Twitter: "I know some of you guys are going to kill me for being too positive, but why do we act like Cam completed 50% of his passes last season? He had his issues, but he ranked 10th in the NFL in adjusted completion percentage and sixth in adjusted completion percentage on deep passes." / Twitter
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
7,611
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
For the folks hard-core against this deal, is Belichick an idiot now? Or is this a 98.5 "Kraft is cheap" take? I'm legit curious about the angle here.

Edit: if you just want to vent because you had your hopes up for Watson megadeal or a huge trade up into the top 3, that's fine too. I'm just trying to understand.
The angle is Belichick is fallible and can make mistakes at times. I mean, what? You can't disagree with the move to bring back Cam fucking Newton without the position being strawmanned? The guy was terrible last year, some people don't think he should be back. Is that really untennable?
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
16,822
Unreal America
That's fine. To me, it wasn't Cam's inaccuracy that was frustrating, in and of itself. It was how impossibly slow (and often bad) his decision making was, at times. And the utterly inconsistent velocity he put on the ball. And choking in 2 huge spots.

But like I said, I'm not mad about them bringing him back. If we're 3-8 in November and he's still starting, then I'll be mad. There is a ton left to play out, though.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,150
around the way
The angle is Belichick is fallible and can make mistakes at times. I mean, what? You can't disagree with the move to bring back Cam fucking Newton without the position being strawmanned? The guy was terrible last year, some people don't think he should be back. Is that really untennable?
The guy pulling the strings for 20 years of unprecedented success in the modern era pulled this string. Did he suddenly get stupid, or does he have his reasons? I'm surprised anyone thinks that it's anything besides the latter, that's all.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,280
The angle is Belichick is fallible and can make mistakes at times. I mean, what? You can't disagree with the move to bring back Cam fucking Newton without the position being strawmanned? The guy was terrible last year, some people don't think he should be back. Is that really untennable?
"Belichick is fallible and Newton might suck again" is different from "Belichick has to learn/doesn't seem to realize that you can't win in the NFL without a QB."
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,512
where I was last at
I'm assuming Cam is insurance and the Pats look for the next guy, be it this draft or next year's. On a standalone basis, underwhelming would be a kind characterization if Cam is seen as an important part of the BB's Pats rebuild in a post-Brady world.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
13,426
Richmond, VA
Was Cam bad all year last year? I mean, I know his numbers were terrible overall. But I seem to remember him being not so bad, and then he got Covid, and then he was just absolutely terrible.
Was he actually a pile of shit all season? Or was there some reason to think he has some upside, post Covid and with a full ore-season?

nore: I’m not saying he’s going to be awesome. Just curious whatthey see his ceiling as?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
44,227
But like I said, I'm not mad about them bringing him back. If we're 3-8 in November and he's still starting, then I'll be mad. There is a ton left to play out, though.
Kyed and Cox did a podcast today. They expect the Pats to be back in postseason hunt. This board seems a lot more negative than some of the folks covering the team.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
2,482
The floor with Cam is a bottom 3 starter in football. We saw it last year. And the fact that he was giving excuses about having to learn a "20 year system" and talking about how COVID totally derailed his season you guys doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.
That was last year's floor, but I have to believe his floor is at least SLIGHTLY higher this year with a full offseason and not getting Covid at the most inopportune time (overall he wasn't near the bottom those first several games). There are a lot of washed QBs who can still win a lot of games if the personnel suits their style. Sure the guy's shoulder doesn't look the same, but I think some of the more heinous throws were also a function of barely partaking in functional practices with his offense. Thinking his receiver was in a 5-yard out instead of 10-yard out etc.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
11,191
[
Kyed and Cox did a podcast today. They expect the Pats to be back in postseason hunt. This board seems a lot more negative than some of the folks covering the team.
They won six games last year and they were a yard short of beating Seattle, about 5 yards short of beating Buffalo, and likely would have beaten Denver had Cam not been stricken with COVID. IOW, they were a hair away from winning 9 games (which would have put them "in the hunt", but a game short as it turned out).

EDIT: Having said that, they would have no chance of making the SB had they made the playoffs, and very possibly would have been one-and-done.
 

djbayko

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,580
Los Angeles, CA
One terrible thing about this deal is that it forces us to have the same shitty debate about whether Cam Newton is a good QB for the 100th time.
 
Last edited:

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,912
Santa Monica, CA
Meh..the line might have been marginally better, but a big part of the running game being much better was Cam, it changes how your run game is defended when you have a high volume running QB.

On the flip side.. there is a good argument that Brady had significantly better pass-catchers (Edelman, Dorsett, Gordon, etc.)
The bolded feels like complete nonsense to me. Teams facing the Patriots last year did not have to account for a passing game. That makes it a lot easier to stop the run. The running game improved this past year because of Damien Harris and the improved O line, not because of Newton.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,740
The bolded feels like complete nonsense to me. Teams facing the Patriots last year did not have to account for a passing game. That makes it a lot easier to stop the run. The running game improved this past year because of Damien Harris and the improved O line, not because of Newton.
Well he rushed for 592 yards (4.3 y/a) and 12 touchdowns, so yes, Cam Newton did help the running game. Did he HURT it more because he sucked at passing, MORE than he helped it with his running? I don't know.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
11,191
One terrible thing about this deal is that it forces us to have the same shitty Cam Newton debate for the 100th time.
There isn't a move they could make that would make us all happy. Even if they traded for Watson, there'd be people who'd say that the Pats "paid too much".

Jimmy G? There'd be people who'd say "meh, they could have done better.He can't stay healthy."
Mariota? Some would say he's a stiff, he's had his shot, that ship has sailed.
Russell Wilson? The price was too high, he's a prima donna and a malcontent as evidenced by his having forced his way out of Seattle.

Etc.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,912
Santa Monica, CA
Well he rushed for 592 yards (4.3 y/a) and 12 touchdowns, so yes, Cam Newton did help the running game. Did he HURT it more because he sucked at passing, MORE than he helped it with his running? I don't know.
Yes, his running certainly was production they didn't have before. But I'm not buying that Harris (and later Michel) were more productive because of Cam. It's not like they were running a spread option with him, the RB carries were mostly standard runs.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
20,280
Kyed and Cox did a podcast today. They expect the Pats to be back in postseason hunt. This board seems a lot more negative than some of the folks covering the team.
Just a likely easier schedule has to help there.
 

patinorange

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 27, 2006
20,644
6 miles from Angel Stadium
Let's hope his arm is physically better than last year. Not much out there unless they were going to blow up the team and go for a Watson or Wilson. Not likely.
Mariota stinks. Fitzgerald? No. Jimmy G? Like him, but sounds like the asking price was too high and durability is a real issue. In Bill, i still trust.
Work on that defense Bill, you are going to need it.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,265
Mansfield MA
The bolded feels like complete nonsense to me. Teams facing the Patriots last year did not have to account for a passing game. That makes it a lot easier to stop the run. The running game improved this past year because of Damien Harris and the improved O line, not because of Newton.
There is reason to think it is true: https://www.musiccitymiracles.com/2018/6/29/17492908/the-effect-of-mobile-quarterbacks-on-running-back-success

Sony had his most efficient year, too, FWIW.

You are definitely right they need to pass better in 2021 than they did in 2020, or for that matter, in 2019 (parts of 2018 were shaky, too). I expect to see some moves to upgrade WR / TE, though maybe not as dramatically as some of us would like.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Member
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
2,241
I think it’s a fine deal as long as the plan is drafting a qb. You usually don’t want a rookie qb that’s not drafted top 3 to start immediately. We have a great o line, great running backs. Sign a tight end and a receiver (please golladay and Henry/Smith?), and we have the makings of a good offense with the only real hole being at quarterback. Let whoever we draft have a bit to acclimate to the league while cam hopefully doesn’t play as horribly as last year
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,364
The bolded feels like complete nonsense to me. Teams facing the Patriots last year did not have to account for a passing game. That makes it a lot easier to stop the run. The running game improved this past year because of Damien Harris and the improved O line, not because of Newton.
It's been pretty well documented that running QBs have a major effect on the running game regardless of their passing proficiency.
Also, I mean, were teams doubling N'Keal Harry or Jacobi Meyers when Brady was the QB? Nobody respected our pass catchers with Brady anyway, maybe having Cam means an extra S in the box on occasion, but that doesn't offset the threat a running QB has, or the advantages of the much later determination of where a play is going that having the option of the QB running gives.

Sony Michel had his best year by carry, it wasn't that Harris was amazing or something, our run game was as expected much better with Cam. The overall offense is going to be bad unless Cam significantly improves his passing, and we add actual receiving threats, but the run game is going to be much better with a running threat at QB than a pocket passer.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
12,740
Yes, his running certainly was production they didn't have before. But I'm not buying that Harris (and later Michel) were more productive because of Cam. It's not like they were running a spread option with him, the RB carries were mostly standard runs.
Well it's just two data points, but, Pats' rushing in consecutive years....

2019: 447 att, 1,703 yds, 3.8 y/a
2020: 502 att, 2,346 yds, 4.7 y/a

Lead RB
2019 (Sony Michel): 247 att, 912 yds, 3.7 y/a
2019 (Sony+Harris): 216 att, 1,140 yds, 5.3 y/a

I know there are many factors at play. One of them is an improved offensive line in 2020 compared to what it was in 2019. But let's do this same exercise but add in the second half of 2019, when NE's OL improved dramatically with Wynn's return from injury.

2019 (total): 447 att, 1,703 yds, 3.8 y/a
2019 (post-bye): 194 att, 867 yds, 4.5 y/a
2020 (total): 502 att, 2,346 yds, 4.7 y/a

So even when they were rushing well in the second half of 2019, they still improved in 2020 over *that*. It's much more challenging to tease out WHY they improved in 2020 on the ground over even the second half of 2019.
 

bagwell1

lurker
Jul 31, 2006
260
Jacksonville
Well it's just two data points, but, Pats' rushing in consecutive years....

2019: 447 att, 1,703 yds, 3.8 y/a
2020: 502 att, 2,346 yds, 4.7 y/a

Lead RB
2019 (Sony Michel): 247 att, 912 yds, 3.7 y/a
2019 (Sony+Harris): 216 att, 1,140 yds, 5.3 y/a

I know there are many factors at play. One of them is an improved offensive line in 2020 compared to what it was in 2019. But let's do this same exercise but add in the second half of 2019, when NE's OL improved dramatically with Wynn's return from injury.

2019 (total): 447 att, 1,703 yds, 3.8 y/a
2019 (post-bye): 194 att, 867 yds, 4.5 y/a
2020 (total): 502 att, 2,346 yds, 4.7 y/a

So even when they were rushing well in the second half of 2019, they still improved in 2020 over *that*. It's much more challenging to tease out WHY they improved in 2020 on the ground over even the second half of 2019.
Andrews agent must love seeing those stats.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
48,622
deep inside Guido territory
Per Mike Garofolo, here is the breakdown of Cam's contract. $3.5 million in guaranteed money.

$2 million signing bonus
$1.5 million base salary(guaranteed)
$1.5 million per game roster bonuses.

$9 million in incentives for playoffs, Pro Bowl, All-Pro, MVP, and Super Bowl MVP.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,200
hmmm. they've spent to the cap essentially every year forever so that can't be why he thinks they're cheap.
It’s a canard repeated endlessly in the press. Probably because New England has prioritized mid level signings over big money ones.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,676
Per Mike Garofolo, here is the breakdown of Cam's contract. $3.5 million in guaranteed money.

$2 million signing bonus
$1.5 million base salary(guaranteed)
$1.5 million per game roster bonuses.

$9 million in incentives for playoffs, Pro Bowl, All-Pro, MVP, and Super Bowl MVP.
I still don't like Cam as a player but that's reasonable. Plenty of cap space to work with.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,364
Per Mike Garofolo, here is the breakdown of Cam's contract. $3.5 million in guaranteed money.

$2 million signing bonus
$1.5 million base salary(guaranteed)
$1.5 million per game roster bonuses.

$9 million in incentives for playoffs, Pro Bowl, All-Pro, MVP, and Super Bowl MVP.
So he's paid like a mid-tier backup and if he becomes the best player in the league, and we win the Superbowl he gets paid like a below average starter.
That's a really team friendly deal. That's like AJ McCarron money.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,792
Maine
1.5 million per game roster bonuses? That almost sounds like he gets 1.5 per game but obviously that isnt right.
So thats @90K a game?