Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 117
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,512
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    2 good games, no? Hes basically become the NE offense. For better or worse, that offense will live and die by Cam, and so far he's got a team that might be 0-2 a yard away from 2-0 and a near win over a top 5 team. The "reasons" 31 teams passed him up were COVID, health, and the fear of him overthrowing their QB.

    He might get injured at the rate they're using him, but it's safe to say his shoulder and foot have healed. Everyone's gonna be eating crow if he keeps up the pace.
    Failing to score 20 pts against Miami, who is trying to lose. Great game!
    Dak: 15,778 @ 65.8%, 7.6 per att, 97+21 TD, 36 INT+31 FMB, 97.0 Rate
    Wentz: 14,191 @ 63.8%, 6.9 per att, 97+3 TD, 35 INT+48 FMB, 92.7 Rate

    2020:
    Dak: 1188 @ 67.1%, 8.3 per att, 5 TD, 2 (1.4%) INT, 98.5 Rate 76.7 QBR
    Wentz: 737 @ 59.8%, 5.6 per att, 3 TD, 6 INT (4.5%), 63.9 Rate 35.5 QBR


    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    I'll leave PSD if Foles isn't the starter in Jax (or elsewhere) next year.
    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack the Ripper View Post
    I'd have bet money that the Chargers were the team that was going to come away with Cam.
    Team that lost their last 3 franchise QBs to injury going to sign an aging, injury prone QB? I'd have taken your money there.
    Dak: 15,778 @ 65.8%, 7.6 per att, 97+21 TD, 36 INT+31 FMB, 97.0 Rate
    Wentz: 14,191 @ 63.8%, 6.9 per att, 97+3 TD, 35 INT+48 FMB, 92.7 Rate

    2020:
    Dak: 1188 @ 67.1%, 8.3 per att, 5 TD, 2 (1.4%) INT, 98.5 Rate 76.7 QBR
    Wentz: 737 @ 59.8%, 5.6 per att, 3 TD, 6 INT (4.5%), 63.9 Rate 35.5 QBR


    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    I'll leave PSD if Foles isn't the starter in Jax (or elsewhere) next year.
    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    The only person looking "****ing stupid" is you, really.

    Half the teams you listed have a rookie-deal QB and can't sign Cam for the same reason the Bears couldn't sign Cam. GM might as well resign if they're replacing their own QB pick.

    Colts -- already had a loaded enough backfield without an RB/QB stealing carries.
    Chargers -- Anthony Lynn was hired based on working with Tyrod Taylor in Buffalo, to run the same offense he ran in Buffalo.
    Jets -- Gase, and not going to replace Darnold. Had a chance to with the GM who picked Darnold being fired though.
    Pats -- they did sign him, which says a lot about your "should have signed him" list. Signing him seems more about BB vs Brady than the good of the Patriots, who need a rebuild despite their defense looking decent last year. Between the COVID holdouts and Gilmore regressing, not looking like the D will be good this year.
    Phins -- again, GM would be resigning here. Cam can't mentor a young QB, bad locker room presence, and they're not really trying to win, they're trying to draft support for Tua.
    Panthers -- don't need a running QB with questionable accuracy downfield when you have CMC, Cam also likely not a culture fit for the new offense being installed there.
    Bears -- GM not resigning, not replacing rookie deal QB.
    WFT -- GM not resigning, not replacing rookie deal QB.

    Jags -- not trying to win, trying to evaluate Minshew and possibly draft a QB. Signing Cam means GM fired.
    Broncos -- Elway, QBs, that's all. Anyone who watches the NFL knows this wouldn't happen.
    Raiders -- Gruden's offense and Cam don't mix. Gruden seemed to be taking a chance on Carr that seems to be paying off so far.
    Browns -- GM fired if Baker was wrong call, so not signing another QB. Outside of that, this is the only suggestion that actually makes sense so far, as the Browns are trying to win.
    Bengals -- GM fired if replacing QB he literally just picked.
    Giants -- somewhat similar to Jets given Jones is probably not the answer, but have bigger issues to deal with. With Barkley out again, tanking the season.

    Bills -- Allen is a do-over on the things they messed up with Cam. The only edge Cam has over Allen is number of injuries.
    49ers -- obviously don't watch the NFL if you think the 49ers can replace their QB without players holding out. No culture fit for Cam.
    Rams -- cap space, mostly. After BB runs Cam into the ground with the Lamar offense, the Rams will probably find a way to sign Cam. If they do, it will likely be what ultimately ends McVay's job in LA.
    Vikes -- Cousins does throw a lot of short passes, which Cam would be suited for. They'd have to trade Cousins, and no one is buying.
    Lions -- would have to trade Stafford, no one is buying there either.
    Cowboys --
    Eagles -- Wentz's contract would be a problem here, and they're already lined up to replace him with Hurtz. Unclear if they're win now or rebuilding. Would be "fewer weapons" for Cam than his time in Carolina, Cam wouldn't sign there.
    Good job writing a ******** dissertation of what I've already said. GMs didn't sign Cam because they're afraid of the repercussions when he supplants their young/supposed franchise QB.

    Keep in mind I literally made 3 different headers to explain that only the first tier "should" have signed him. The second tier "could" have signed him (he signed for peanuts, anyone could've squeezed him into their cap). The third tier is players hes arguably better than.

    Also kudos for pulling "cant mentor a young rookie/bad locker room presence" bs. Considering how much Kyle Love and Will Grier said he helped them last year when everyone claimed Love was the future franchise QB. Also notice how the Pats fan base has basically fallen in love with Cam even before the first game. Hes a damn good leader, regardless of your predetermined opinions. The Dolphins are 2-0 if they made the smart decision to boot Fitztragic and use Cam as their placeholder for Tua.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    Matt Ryan vs Seahawks
    450 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT (Gurley: 56 yards, 1 TD)

    Cam vs Seahawks
    397 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT (47 yards rushing, 2 TD vultured from Sony Michel)



    Josh Allen vs Miami
    417 yards, 4 TDs (18 yards rushing, Singletary: 56 yards)

    Cam vs Miami
    155 yards, 0 TDs (75 yards rushing, 2 TDs vultured from Sony Michel)


    So far he has underperformed against the weak defenses he has faced. The only thing propping up his stats is that NE effectively has no RB with Cam in the game.
    Pats YPC (more than 5 carries)

    Cam: 4.7 ypc
    Michel: 3.3 ypc
    Burkhead: 2.6 ypc

    As I've said, the Pats offense is NOT good. They've got the defense concerned about Cam, yet it still ooks like Cam's the only production they're getting in the run game. Michel is trash and Buckhead is a better receiver. Funny enough, I'm pretty sure the only TD Michel has was leached from Cam running it down to the 1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    Failing to score 20 pts against Miami, who is trying to lose. Great game!
    They scored 21, and would've been 28 if Harry hadn't fumbled out of the endzone at the 1. Comparably, they only scored 20 last year with Brady against a worse Miami team.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,811
    Gotta love the idea that QB TDs are "vultured" from the RB, when having a running QB in goal line situations is an obvious advantage. It's like having an extra player vs. a QB who only hands off.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Gotta love the idea that QB TDs are "vultured" from the RB, when having a running QB in goal line situations is an obvious advantage. It's like having an extra player vs. a QB who only hands off.
    Notice nobody ever cries about vultured TDs when a QB throws an uncovered 1 yard TD. Hell, nobody cries vulture when Brady gets a couple 1 yard QB sneaks per year.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,512
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Gotta love the idea that QB TDs are "vultured" from the RB, when having a running QB in goal line situations is an obvious advantage. It's like having an extra player vs. a QB who only hands off.
    CMC with Cam: 1965 yards, 13 TD
    Cam Stats: 488 yards. 4 TD
    Total: 2,453, 17 TD

    CMC without Cam: 2392 yards, 19 TD
    Kyle Allen: 106 yards, 2 TDs
    Will Grier: 22 yards
    Total: 2,520, 21 TD


    Yards and TDs that would have been gained by an RB with a passing QB aren't "advantages". They're mostly disadvantages because instead of wearing down an RB that is easy to replace, you wear down a QB which takes a long time to replace.
    Dak: 15,778 @ 65.8%, 7.6 per att, 97+21 TD, 36 INT+31 FMB, 97.0 Rate
    Wentz: 14,191 @ 63.8%, 6.9 per att, 97+3 TD, 35 INT+48 FMB, 92.7 Rate

    2020:
    Dak: 1188 @ 67.1%, 8.3 per att, 5 TD, 2 (1.4%) INT, 98.5 Rate 76.7 QBR
    Wentz: 737 @ 59.8%, 5.6 per att, 3 TD, 6 INT (4.5%), 63.9 Rate 35.5 QBR


    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    I'll leave PSD if Foles isn't the starter in Jax (or elsewhere) next year.
    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    CMC with Cam: 1965 yards, 13 TD
    Cam Stats: 488 yards. 4 TD
    Total: 2,453, 17 TD

    CMC without Cam: 2392 yards, 19 TD
    Kyle Allen: 106 yards, 2 TDs
    Will Grier: 22 yards
    Total: 2,520, 21 TD


    Yards and TDs that would have been gained by an RB with a passing QB aren't "advantages". They're mostly disadvantages because instead of wearing down an RB that is easy to replace, you wear down a QB which takes a long time to replace.
    Except years of watching Stewart get stuffed at the goal line behind our trash OL proves that it's not a guarantee the RB gets these yards/TDs. Cam is the best short yardage weapon of the last decade and maybe on NFL history. At one point he had more 1st down conversions and TDs than most of the top RBs. Watching Stewart get stuffed on the first 2 runs only to see Cam fly over defenders for the TD shows his value in short situations.

    Your numbers are off BTW. Not sure what you used, but here's a comparison of CMC with Cam for 14 games in 2018 vs CMC without Cam for 14 games in 2019.

    2018: 194 att, 979 yards, 7 rushTD, 110 targets, 94 rec, 768 rec yards, 6 rec TD.
    Total: 1747 yards, 13 TDs

    2019: 252 att, 1222 yards, 13 rushTD, 125 targets, 104 rec, 908 rec yards, 4 rec TD.
    Total: 2130 yards, 17 TDs

    When you account for Cams rushing vs Grier/Allen AND ignore the fact that Cam was playing banged up those last few games of 2018, it's pretty even (2019 has a couple more TDs, yardage is near identical).

    HOWEVER: look at the touches and efficiency.

    CMC 2018: 125 YPG on 20.5 touches per game, 5.04 YPC, 6.07 yards per touch.

    CMC 2019: 152 YPG, on 25.4 touches per game, 4.85 YPC, 5.98 yards per touch.

    He was more efficient with Cam, but got forced the ball in 2019 because he was our best player. He also took another huge step from 2018 to 2019, so it's hard to say how much better he would've been with a healthy Cam and Moore/Samuel being added to the mix.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    7,455
    Some of y'all are absolutely pathetic. Cam is a very good QB. I don't know why a few of y'all go out of your way (and look like absolute dumbasses doing it) to try and make the man look bad. He's a special, once in a lifetime player. Just enjoy it instead of worrying about your fragile ego and "having to be right". Is he the best ever to play the position? No. If he's healthy is he a top 10 QB right now? Yep.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,528
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    NFLRadio made a good point on this yesterday. If the Bears sign Cam itís almost impossible not to start him. They wanted someone to push Trubusky but not actually supplant him.

    That way if he fails you go to Foles without the pressure to keep him long term. You can ditch Trubisky, keep Foles another year, and draft someone new.

    If you bring in Cam, thereís pressure to start him, which means you never get to see is Trubiskyís 2019 was injury or bad play, which means you need to keep Cam.

    Iíll be honest thereís two teams that should have signed Cam that didnít and itís the Colts and the Chargers.
    Thatís why a lot of teams didnít sign Cam. Cam wanted to start, he didnít want to be a backup. If Chicago had signed him (they should have signed him) that would mean the end of the Trubiski experiment. They werenít ready to do that, even though they should have been.

    Teams with an established QB or teams with a young (good) QB wouldnít want Cam coming in and stealing the show and earning the starting job.

    I really think the Pats weíre ready to tank until the price for Cam was just too good to pass up.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #71
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    I really think the Pats weíre ready to tank until the price for Cam was just too good to pass up.
    If you're ready to tank, you don't abandon that plan because you can get a QB for one year on the cheap.

    I don't think Belichick would ever intend to tank anyway... there's no way he would half-*** his job for a year. Besides, the roster isn't really bad. Of course it's not great either, but they have plenty of pieces to work with.

    The signs were there that the QB market was unusually satisfied. Nobody even wanted to trade for Cam, although the Bears traded for Foles (to be a backup). So I really don't think it's that crazy an assumption that Belichick expected he could get Cam for cheap.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    19,230
    Cam was impressive against Seattle but the defense is terrible Seattle is going to have to rely on the offense this year.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    If you're ready to tank, you don't abandon that plan because you can get a QB for one year on the cheap.

    I don't think Belichick would ever intend to tank anyway... there's no way he would half-*** his job for a year. Besides, the roster isn't really bad. Of course it's not great either, but they have plenty of pieces to work with.

    The signs were there that the QB market was unusually satisfied. Nobody even wanted to trade for Cam, although the Bears traded for Foles (to be a backup). So I really don't think it's that crazy an assumption that Belichick expected he could get Cam for cheap.
    Yeah, I think people overestimate how much time Bill actually has left. Hes pushing 70, there's no way he has any intention of lingering for a wasted rebuild when he wouldn't be around to reap the benefits. He likely things he can win another SB in the next 2-3 years, and I personally think Cam is part of those plans.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,747
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    If you're ready to tank, you don't abandon that plan because you can get a QB for one year on the cheap.

    I don't think Belichick would ever intend to tank anyway... there's no way he would half-*** his job for a year. Besides, the roster isn't really bad. Of course it's not great either, but they have plenty of pieces to work with.

    The signs were there that the QB market was unusually satisfied. Nobody even wanted to trade for Cam, although the Bears traded for Foles (to be a backup). So I really don't think it's that crazy an assumption that Belichick expected he could get Cam for cheap.
    When you really want somebody you donít give everyone an opportunity to sign him. The only way you let it get to that point is because your willing to walk away from the player.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,246
    Quote Originally Posted by mariner4life View Post
    When you really want somebody you donít give everyone an opportunity to sign him. The only way you let it get to that point is because your willing to walk away from the player.
    We also don't know what Cam's camp was asking for when he was first released. Cam could've easily gotten 20-25M if he had been released in February. By the time he was released teams couldn't do any medical workouts to check his injury recovery due to COVID restrictions and by the time he was released most teams had already signed someone else.

    BB couldn't afford Cam if Cam didn't take a prove it deal. Before settlements and opt-outs the Pats were strapped for cap space.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •